K.T. Thomas ORDER
K.T. Thomas, J.
1. The question involved in this appeal is whether tyres of the size 1800 and above manufactured for fitment to heavy moving vehicles such as dumpers and earth movers are exigible to excise duty as "tyres for motor vehicles". This appeal by special leave is in challenge of the order passed by the Central Government in exercise of their revisional powers under Section 36(2) of the Central Excises and Salt Act 1944 (for short 'the Act') decided against the appellant holding that such tyres are also "tyres for motor-vehicles" as envisaged in Item No. 16 of the Central Excise Tariff (1st Schedule to the Act).
2. Appellant company has been manufacturing tyres and tubes of varying sizes which are excisable under Item No. 16 of the Central Excise Tariff. The said item, during the relevant period, contains the following descriptions :
Item No. 16 - TYRES
------------------------------------------------------------- Item No. Tariff Description Rate of Duty ------------------------------------------------------------- 16. Tyres ------------------------------------------------------------- "Tyre" means a pneumatic tyre in the manufacture of which rubber is used and includes the inner tube, the tyre flap and the outer cover of such a tyre ------------------------------------------------------------- 1. Tyres for motor vehicles 60% ad valorem ------------------------------------------------------------- 2. For cycle (other than motor cycles) : ------------------------------------------------------------- (a) Tyres 60 p. per tyre or 15% ad valorem whichever is higher. -------------------------------------------------------------- (b) Tubes 30 p. per tube or 15% ad valorem whichever is higher. -------------------------------------------------------------- 3. All other tyres 20% ad valorem --------------------------------------------------------------
3. Appellant adopted the stand that tyres of the size 1800 and above do not fall within the category of "tyres for motor vehicles" and hence the proper classification of such tyres should be under the residuary sub-item 3 "all other tyres". Excise duty was collected from the appellant for such tyres treating them as tyres for motor vehicles. Appellant made claims for refund of the excess amount with the Assistant Collector of Central Excise, Faridabad. All such claims were rejected by the Assistant Collector. However, on appeals preferred by the appellant, the Appellate Collector of Central Excise, New Delhi, reversed the orders of the Assistant Collector upholding the contention of the appellant. But Central Government in exercise of the revisional powers under Section