9911796707
TMI Blog1987 (7) TMI 234X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... arh is the respondent. The questions involved being similar, appeals are being decided together. 2. The main question to be decided in all these appeals is whether the nickel catalyst, bleaching activated earth and activated carbon (admittedly classifiable under Tariff Item No. 68 CET) used by M/s Kashmir Vanaspati (hereinafter referred to as the appellants) in the course of manufacture of vegetable product are entitled to the benefit of notification No. 201/79-CE (hereinafter referred to as the said Notification) or not. Another question that would arise is whether the demand raised by the Revenue against the appellants was in time. 3. The admitted facts are that nickel catalyst is used as a catalyst in the production of vege ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... aid Notification. He further held that as the appellants took credit before filing the declaration, the provisions of paras 1 & 2 of the appendix attached to the said Notification were contravened and that the amount taken as credit should be recovered. 5. These orders were upheld by the Collector, Central Excise (Appeals), except that he held the demand for credit availed of more than six months prior to the date of show cause notice as time-barred. 6. We heard Shri Lachman Dev, for the Appellants and Shri Shishir Kumar, the learned SDR for the Revenue. According to the learned Consultant for the Appellants Shri Lachman Dev, a number of decisions of the CEGAT in similar matters held that for the purpose of the said notificati ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ality should not act as a bar to the appellants from availing the benefit of the said notification. 8. The learned Consultant argued that Section 11 A of the Central Excises and Salt Act applied to the instant demand and therefore the time-bar prescribed therein applied to the demand, which was raised after more than 6 months from the relevant date. Referring to the Revenue's appeal, he submitted that having raised the demand under Section 11 A the Revenue now cannot argue that Section 11 A of the Act did not apply. 9. Shri Shishir Kumar, the learned SDR opposing the arguments submitted that the nickel catalyst is neither a raw material nor a component part. He referred us to the definition of raw material contained in the Rev ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... provisions of the same Notification but the inputs concerned in those judgments were different. Nickel catalyst was not examined in any of the appeals. Therefore, we are not going into the details of the judgment. The Question as to whether Nickel Catalyst is eligible to the benefit of the said Notification has necessarily to be decided with reference to Notification itself. This Notification exempts (subject to stated conditions) excisable goods if they are used as the raw materials and components parts of other excisable goods. The essential conditions for availing the said Notification are :- (i) The goods (outputs) should be excisable. (ii) Duty of excise should be leviable on them. (iii) The inputs should fall under Item No. 68 CET ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pret the word "raw material" according to the common parlance or as defined in the dictionary. The words "raw material" as used in the definition of "manufacture" denote merely material from which a final product is made; in other words, which after undergoing process gets converted into a distinct product. Commissioner of Sales Tax v. Standard Metal Industries, (198O) 45 S.T.C. 229 at 231 (Delhi)." 17. That brings us to the question as to whether the catalyst is a component part of vegetable product. Component part has not been defined in the Notification or anywhere in the Central Excise. 18. Examining the word "component part" the Law Lexicon by Sh. T.P. Mukherjee, 1982 (Vol. 1) records as follows :- COMPONENT PART "Dictio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ly, it may be that when a machinery is assembled out of several parts forming that machinery, those parts even after their being fitted may retain their individuality or identity." 19. It is the admitted position that the nickel catalyst is not present in the final vegetable product. Probably its presence in the final product constitutes a health hazard. Considering the above extract from the Law Lexicon we have no hesitation in holding that nickel catalyst is not a component part of vegetable product. 20. As a result, we find that nickel catalyst cannot be considered as a "raw material" as a "component part". Therefore, nickel catalyst used in the manufacture of vegetable product cannot be extended to the benefit of the said ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
