BAJAJ TEMPO LTD Vs. COLLECTOR OF C. EX.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE issue involved in this appeal filed by M/s. Bajaj Tempo Ltd., against the Order -in -Appeal No. P/83/92 dated 30 -3 -1992 passed by the Collector (Appeals) Pune, is whether the three wheeler motor vehicles and chassis therefor manufactured by them and described as "Tempo, three wheeler autorickshaw classifiable under Subheadings 8703.00 and 8706.30 respectively of the schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act are eligible for exemption under Notification No. 162/86 -C.E., dated 1 -3 -1986 or the product is not an autorickshaw and consequently not eligible for benefit of the said Notification, as held by the Collector (Appeals) in the impugned Order.

(2.) BRIEFLY stated the facts are that M/s. Bajaj Tempo Ltd., manufacture, inter alia, Tempo three wheeler Autorickshaw and chasis therefor, which were classified by them under Sub -headings 8703.00 and 8706.30 respectively and they claimed concessional rate of duty under Notification No. 162/86, dated 1 -3 -1986; that the classification lists effective from 1 -3 -1989 and 20 -3 -1990 were approved by the Assistant Collector allowing the concessional rate of duty; that on an application filed by the Department, Collector (Appeals), under the impugned Order, disallowed the exemption under the Notification holding that as per the Notification S.O. 436 (E) dated 12 -6 -1989, issued under Section 41(4) of the Motor Vehicles Act, the vehicle in question is not an autorickshaw as it has the seating capacity for six passengers (excluding driver).

(3.) SHRI C. S. Lodha, learned Advocate, submitted that the impugned vehicles are manufactured by them since 1977; that after proper scruitny and examination, the proper officer approved the classification list from 1977 onwards as 'autorickshaw' that Chapter IV of the Motor Vehicles Act deals with the subject of Registration of motor vehicles; that sections 39 and 40 of the Motor Vehicles Act (M.V. Act) provides that no person shall drive a motor vehicle unless it is registered and every owner of a vehicle shall get the vehicle registered by a registering authority; section 41 of the M.V. Act, provides the method for getting the vehicles registered, i.e., application, fee etc.; Section 41(4) provides that in addition to the other particulars required to be included in the certificate of registration, it shall also specify the type of the motor vehicle, being a type as the Central Government may, having regard to the design, construction and use of the motor vehicle, by notification specify; that in exercise of the powers conferred under Section 41(4), the Central Government issued Notification No. 436(E), dated 12 -6 -1989, specifying the types of motor vehicles mentioned in the Table annexed to the said notification as the type in respect of the motor vehicle specified in the corresponding entry; that under the broad heading 'Light Motor Vehicle', the type of motor vehicles specified were Three Wheelers -Passenger vehicle Autorickshaw, Tempo, Motorised Cycle Rickshaw and Invalid Carriage; that for the purpose of the said Notification, the distinction has been made even between ambulance and animal ambulance and also between autorickshaw which could carry three passengers and other autorickshaws which could carry more than three passengers. The learned Advocate further submitted that the definition of autorickshaw given in the said Notification was for a very limited purpose, namely, to indicate on a registration certificate the type of the vehicle; that the said notification was not intended and cannot be applied to mean that it embodied the commercial undertaking of 'autorickshaw' as is sought to be done in the impugned Order; that as the Excise Tariff does not define the expression 'Autorjckshaw', the said expression must take its meaning and colour from the meaning in which it is generally understood in Commercial parlance as well as in Common parlance; that it is well settled that one has to be extremely cautious in importing the definition given in a particular statute to a particular expression for fulfilling a particular need to other taxation statues.