TMI Blog1989 (8) TMI 206X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in the appeal memo, may be summarised as under: The respondents are the manufacturers of vegetable product falling under Tariff Item 13. The respondents availed of credit benefits in terms of Notification No. 201/79, dated 4-6-1979 as amended by Notification No. 105/82-C.E., dated 28-2-1982 in respect of Vitamins A D falling under Tariff Item 68, which, according to the Revenue, was not admissible to them after issuance of amending Notification No. 105/82 as Vitamins A D were not raw materials/component parts in terms of notification. The total credit so availed of by the respondents during the period 1-3-1982 to 28-6-1984 amounted to Rs. 22,694.85 P. So, a show cause notice dated 7-7-1984 was issued to the respondents and after adjud ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o use Vitamins A D and that Vitamin A is added only to confirm a particular standard of quality. He, further contended that under the said order, items raw materials and Vitamins are grouped under heads 13A(1) and 13A(4) sqarately which would confirm that vitamins are not raw materials for the manufacture of the product, in question. The Vitamins A D also cannot be called component parts -because these words are used in relation to machinery, etc. only. He cited C.C.E., Chandigarh and Another v. Kashmir Vanaspati and Another -1987 (31) E.L.T. 218 (Tribunal) wherein connotation of words raw material and component part and their ambit and scope are laid down. 5. Now, it is admitted by Shri Mathur for the respondent that Vitamins ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and as per A19 vanaspati (which means any refined vegetable oil) has to contain not less than 25 I.U. of synthetic Vitamin A per gram. 7. He, further, referred us to the definition of word adulterated as laid down under Section 2(ia) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 (as amended upto 1986), relevant portion of which is as under : 2(ia) - Adulterated" - an article of food shall be deemed to be adulterated (a) * * * * (b) * * * * (1) * * * * (m) if the quality or purity of the article falls below the prescribed standard or its constituents are present in quantities not within the prescribed limits of variability but which does not render it injurious to health. 8. He, further submitted that as per the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... with reference to 7 items, it was held that all those inputs were essentially required for the manufacture of the product, in question, in that case (namely, paper or paper board). So, according to Shri Chakravorty, this is the criteria laid down by the Tribunal. But, in the present case also, as we discussed above, vitamins, especially, Vitamin A is a necessary ingredient as it is a statutory requirement for manufacture of the product, in question. So, this judgment does not help the Revenue. (2) Panyam Cements Mineral Industries Limited, Ballary v. Collector of Central Excise, Belgaum -1989 (13) E.T.R. 181 (Tri.) - In this case, the issue was dutiability of calcium carbide manufactured by the assessee and used by them in the manufa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nd phosphoric acid are held not to be raw material or components. But then this citation also does not help the contention of the Revenue. 10. Against this Shri Mathur contended that as per supplement of the manual of departmental instruction on excisable manufactured products pertaining to vegetable product issued by Central Board of Excise and Customs, vanaspati manufacture should conform to the specifications as laid down and one of the specifications is that it should be fortified with synthetic Vitamin A by adding 25 (I.U.) per gram. Flow chart of the vegetable product has also been given in this manual (at page 20) and as per this, fortification of the vegetable products, with vitamin is to be done before the product is to be take ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the Revenue that the product, in question, will attract duty before vitamins are added, is not correct. So, we are of the opinion that contention raised by the Revenue is not correct and in the present case the product, in question, will attract excise duty only when it reaches R.G. 1 stage and so C.E. duty paid on Vitamins A D will be eligible for set off under provisions of Notification No. 201/79 as amended by Notification No. 105/82 and we do not find any impropriety in the impugned order. 12. In the impugned order, the Collector (Appeals) has referred to the contention of the respondent that a show cause notice was time-barred and that there is substance in it. But, he did not decide that point as he allowed the appeal on merits ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
