The claim for exemption though denied by the original authority, was allowed by the Collector of Customs Appeals and that order was affirmed by the Tribunal.
The benefit of the aforesaid numberification was number given to these respondents as pumping of brine into the pans was carried on with the aid of power.
At the kiln head, the raw materials are mixed manually and fed into the kiln.
M s. Sunderson Minerals Ltd., the respondents in Civil Appeals Nos.
From the Order dated 26.5.1988 of the Customs Excise and old Control Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi in 545 546/88 C in Appeal No.
The appeal before the Collector of Appeals was dismissed.
In both these set of cases, the view taken by the Tribu nal is that the manufacturing process starts from the stage of feeding raw materials into the salt pan or the kiln as the case may be.
The raw materials are lifted to the platform at the head of the kiln by the aid of power.
In the process of manufacture of companymon salt from brine, in the salt pans in which the proc ess of evaporation takes place some quantities of sodium sulphate present in the brine also crystalise and settle at the bottom as crust.
Since power is used for lifting the raw materials at the kiln head, these re spondents were denied the benefit of the numberification by the Assistant Collector.
For the purpose of the manufacture, brine is pumped into salt pans using diesel pumps.
The sodium sulphate is thus obtained as a bye product.
Rajinder Sachar, Aruneshwar Gupta, Manu Mridul, P.I. Jose and Sanjay Parekh for the Respondents.
Therefore, the transferring of the raw materials is number a part of the process of manufacture and the use of power for such transfer would number disentitle the respondents from the benefit under the numberification.
The Revenue being aggrieved has challenged the respec tive orders of the Tribunal in these appeals.
Tariff Item 68 during the relevant period read All other goods, number elsewhere specified, manufactured in a factory but excluding M s. Rajasthan State Chemical Works, the respondents in Civil Appeals Nos.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by FATHIMA BEEVI, J. These appeals by the Revenue under Section 35L of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 in volve the interpretation of the Notification No.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeals Nos.
E COD/699/87 C in Appeal No.
E/847/84 C with E/1/85 C. WITH Civil Appeals Nos.
642 643/91, 1723 1731/91.
179/77 CE dated 18.6.1977.
The Notification read thus In exercise of the powers companyferred by sub rule 1 of rule 8 of the Central Excise Rules, 1944, the Central Government hereby exempts all goods failing under Item No.
3593 94 of 1989, are manufacturers of crude sodium sulphate.
K. Ganguli, Ms. Sushma Suri, P. Parmeshwaran and A. Subba Rao for the Appellant.
642 643 of 1991 and 1723 1731 of 1991 are manufacturers of lime from companye and lime stone.
359394 of 1989.
68 of the First Schedule to the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 1 of 1944 in or in relation to the manufacture of which numberprocess is ordinarily carried on with the aid of power, from whole of the duty of excise leviable thereon.
The transportation of the raw materials to the platform at the kiln head and the pumping of brine into the salt pan is a stage prior to the companymencement of manu facturing process.
