2015(10)LCX0037

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

A.K. Sikri and Rohinton Fali Nariman, JJ.

COMMISSIONER OF CUS. & C. EXCISE

Versus

VIJAY MINING EQUIPMENTS

Civil Appeal No. 4247 of 2007 with C.A. Nos. 4224,4229 & 4623 of2007\ 10260 of20102 and 3682 of 2012, decided on 13-10-2015

Cases Quoted -

Collector v. L.M.P. Precision Eng. Co. Ltd. - 2003(12)LCX0060 Eq 2004 (163) ELT 0290 (S.C.) - Referred [Para 3]

Advocated By -

S/Shri A.K. Panda, Sr. Advocate, Arijit Prasad, Ms.
Sunita Rani Singh and B. Krishna Prasad, Advocates, for the Appellant.
S/Shri Rupesh Kumar, Jitin Singhal, Pratik, Hrishikesh, M.P. Devanath and Irshad Ahmad, Advocates, for the Respondent.

[Order]. -

The issue involved in the present appeals is whether drilling rigs mounted on motor vehicles chassis are classifiable under Chapter subheading 8703.00 as claimed by the Revenue or it is classified under Chapter subheading 8430.00 as claimed by the assessee. The Tribunal by the impugned judgment has accepted the contention of the assessee herein. In order to appreciate the matter, we reproduce these entries hereunder:

84.30

8430.00

Other moving, grading, levelling, scraping, excavating, tamp­ing, compacting, extracting or boring machinery, for earth, minerals or ores; pile-drivers and pile-extractors; snow-ploughs and snow-blowers.

13%

87.05

8705.00

Special purpose motor-vehicles, other than those principally designed for the transport of persons or goods (for example, breakdown lorries, crane lorries, fire fighting vehicles, con­crete-mixer lorries, road sweeper lorries, spraying lorries, mobile workshops, mobile radiological units).

15%


2. It is difficult to accept the contention of the Revenue, which seeks to cover the case under Chapter Heading 8705.00, as it is clear from the reading of the said entry that it relates to special purpose motor vehicles, excluding those designed for the transport of persons or goods. The goods in question are drilling rigs, though mounted on motor vehicles chassis. By no stretch of imagination it can be treated as special purpose motor vehicles.

3. We, thus, are of the opinion that the Tribunal rightly held that when drilling rigs and the motor vehicles are not integrally connected, the case would not fall within Chapter Heading 8705.00. On that basis, the Tribunal also distinguished the present case from the judgment of this Court in CCE, Baroda v. L.M.P. Precision Engineering Pvt. Ltd. [2004 (9) SCC 703 = 2003(12)LCX0060 Eq 2004 (163) ELT 0290 (S.C.)]. We, thus, do not find any merit in these appeals.


4. These appeals are, accordingly, dismissed.

Equivalent 2015 (325) ELT 0231 (S.C.)