Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal
M/S. Tata Motors Ltd vs Commissioner Of Central Excise, ... on 9 July, 2013
CUSTOMS, EXCISE & SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL,
WEST BLOCK NO.II, R.K. PURAM, NEW DELHI-110066.
BENCH-DB
Excise Appeal No.E/ 3384/2005-EX[DB] &
Excise Appeal No.E/3386/2005-EX[DB]
[Arising out of Order-in-Appeal No.389-CE/2005 dated 27.07.2005 & 398-CE/2005 dated 28.07.2005 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), Lucknow].
M/s. Tata Motors Ltd. Appellant
Vs.
Commissioner of Central Excise, Lucknow Respondent
Present for the Appellant : Shri H. Bajaj, Advocate
Present for the Respondent: Shri Sanjay Jain, DR
Coram:Honble Mrs. Archana Wadhwa, Member (Judicial)
Honble Mr. Rakesh Kumar, Member (Technical)
Date of Hearing/Decision: 09.07.2013
FINAL ORDER NO. 56991-56992/2013 DATED: 09.07.2013
PER: ARCHANA WADHWA
The dispute in the present appeal relates to the benefit of Notification No. 6/02-CE dated 1/3/02 which entitles the manufacturer to claim refund of duty paid at the time of clearance of the motor vehicle, if the said motor vehicle is subsequently registered as taxi within a period of three months from the date of clearance of the same. In as much as in the present case, such registration was within a period of six months, the lower authorities have denied the refund claim.
2. We note that the said notification prescribes a period of three months for registration of the vehicle as taxi or further extended period of three months is also provided. Revenue has entertained a view that further extended period of three months is only for submission of the registration certificate and the vehicle has to be necessarily registered within the initial period of three months.
4. Ld. Advocate submits that the vehicles were registered within the period of 6 months and he can establish the said fact before the original adjudicating authority, if the matter is remanded.
3. We find that the issue is no more res-integra and stand settled in the appellants own case reported as Tata Motors Ltd. vs. CCE, Lucknow reported in 2012 (278) E.L.T. 685 (Tri. Del.). It stands held with the said decision that the extended period of three months, as mentioned in the notification, is for registration of the vehicle and not merely for submission of the registration certificate. We also find that there is dispute about the period within which the refund claims were filed. The same are required to be filed within a period of 6 months from the date of payment of duty. As per ld. Advocate, the refund claims were filed within the period of 6 months and the said fact can be verified by the original adjudicating authority. Another dispute relates to submission of registration certificate of the vehicle as taxi and ambulance. As the matter is being remanded, the appellant would produce the evidence and the registration certificates before the original adjudicating authority. Further, the fact that some of the vehicles were supplied to Societies, which are registered with the Hospital/Nursing Homes etc., the appellant would also produce evidence of such registration, so as to earn the exemption. In a nutshell, the legal issue stands clarified by us and the matter being remanded for verification of various certificates and the other factual positions. Both the appeals are allowed by way of remand.
[Dictated & Pronounced in the open Court].
(RAKESH KUMAR) (ARCHANA WADHWA) MEMBER (TECHNICAL) MEMBER (JUDICIAL) Anita 3 3 E/ 3384/2005-EX[DB] & Excise Appeal No.E/3386/2005-EX[DB]