Commissioner of Central Excise Vs. Atul Products Ltd.

1. the issue for decision in this appeal is whether mercury which is used as cathode in the electrolysis of brine for the manufacture of caustic soda can be considered as an input in terms of rule 57a. in the order impugned in the appeal, the collector (appeals) has, following the decision of the tribunal in c.c.e. v. mettur chemicals & industrials - 1991 (17) etr 560, held that it is an input. hence this appeal.2. the departmental representative urges the ground in the appeal that the cathode is an essential part of the apparatus for electrolysis and therefore is a part of machinery used for manufacturing the input. she further draws our attention to the ground in the appeal which seeks to derive support from the clarification in the circular no. 9/98, dated 21-3-1989 of the board.3. representative of the respondent cites the decision of the tribunal in c.c.e. v. modi alkalies & chemicals ltd. -1994 (74) e.l.t. 966, in which mercury, while functioning as an electrode in the process of electrolysis continues to remain mercury, does not become a part of the machinery.4. in the decision relied upon by the collector (appeals), the tribunal had declined to accept the plea made before it, that mercury is a part of machinery because mercury was being used up in the process. there is nothing in the appeal to rebut this specific finding, which derives support from the other decisions cited by the respondent. even if we accept the point in the appeal that mercury is a part of the machinery in electrolysis, that fact by itself would not be sufficient to deny the credit. the tribunal has held in union carbide (india) ltd. v.c.c.e. - 1996 (86) e.l.t. 613 that parts of machines, machinery, apparatus etc. do not come within the scope of the explanation to rule 57a which specifies the excluded category of inputs.