1999 INSC 0931
                                 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
                                           Vikrant Tyres Ltd.
                                                  Versus

                                Collector of Central Excise, Madras
                     (S.P. Bharucha, R.C. Lahoti and N. Santosh Hedge, JJ)

                                   Civil Appeal No. 7749 of 1995
                                               01.12.1999

JUDGMENT

S.P. Bharucha, J.--

The appellants are manufacturers of tyres. They imported radial tyres in 1984 for the purposes of
testing them prior to commencing manufacture thereof. For the purposes of the payment of
countervailing duty thereon. Claimed benefit of excise duty Exemption Notification No. 20/84 dated
1.3.1984. The same was denied to them upon the basis that the tyres that they had imported were
designed for on-and off-road application. In the Tribunal's view, the said notification did not
provide for concessional rate of duty in respect of, in its words, "tyres for vehicles or equipments
designed for use off the road". It was said that the said notification did not apply to tyres specifically
designed for on/off road application. The order of the Tribunal is under appeal.

2. We will proceed upon the basis that these were tyres which were intended for on-and off-
    road application, though it is disputed on behalf of the appellants. Their case is that the tyres
    for on-road use.

3. Tyres fall under Heading 16 of the Central Excise Tariff. Sub-heading (1) thereof refers to
    tyres for tyres for motor vehicles and reads thus :

                     "(1) Tyres for motor vehicles ­

                     a. Tyres for two-wheeled motor vehicles, namely, scooters, motorcycles,
                         mopeds and autocycles--

                     (i) Tyres                        fifty rupees tyre.

                     (ii) tubes    twenty-five per cent

                     b. Others---

                     (i) tyres                        One thousand and five.

                                                      Hundred rupees per tyre."
2. Sub-heading (II) deals with tyres for cycles and cycle-rickshaws. Sub-heading (III) deals
    with tyres for vehicles or equipment designed for use off the road. The first explanation to
    Heading 16 says that the expression "motor vehciles" means all mechanically-propelled
    vehicles, other than tractors, designed for use upon roads. The said notification grants
    exemption to, interalia, tyres for motor vehicles other than tyres for autorickshaws and salon
    cars of the size therein stated. If they fall within sub-heading (1)(b) (i) of heading 16. It is
    within this sub-heading that the appellants claim the tyres they imported fall.

3. The question really is whether the tyres which were imported fall within sub-heading (1) of
    item 16, as the appellants contend, or within sub-heading (III) deals with tyres for vehicles
    or equipment designed for use of the road. It is nobody's case that the tyres that were
    imported were specific for vehicles or equipment designed for use off the road. What is
    relied upon non behalf of the respondents is, at best, a statement that these tyres are capable
    of use on the road and off the road. It is enough if the tyres are capable of use on the road
    and are fitted to a mechanically-propelled vehicles, other than a tractor, designed for use
    upon the road. This is not in question. Clearly, then, the imported tyres fall within sub-
    heading (1)(b)(i) of Item 16 and are entitled to the exemption given by the said notification.

4. The civil appeal is allowed and the order under appeal is set aside.
5. Refund, if any, shall be payable if admissible under the law. No order as to costs.