Judgment:
1. This appeal is filed by the Department against the order of the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals), Trichy dated 28-10-1992. None present for the respondent when the matter was called.
2. The Ld. D.R. submitted that the issue for consideration is whether Metron 22 can be treated as a input in the manufacture of Tri-chloroethylene. It was submitted that this is used in the refrigeration plant for bringing down the temperature and therefore cannot be called an input.
3. On going through the entire record and also considering the submissions made we are of the view that the reasson given by the Ld.
Collector (Appeals) in para 9 in the impugned order is acceptable. The Ld. Collector dealing with the issue has observed as under : 9. Although it is not the subject matter of the show cause notice, it also appears that the department was under the impression that MAFFRON-22 being a refrigerant is not entitled to input credit. In this connection, it may be stated that Modvat credit in respect of METRON-22 gas used as refrigerant in the manufacture of Tri-chloroethylene in M/s. Chemicals and Plastics India Ltd., was treated to be an eligible input for purpose of Modvat credit vide order-in-appeal No. 186/91 (CBE), dated 29-5-1991 based on Government of India's order No. 1268 of 1978, dated 13-11-1978 followed by Collector (Appeals), Madras in order-in-appeal No. 91/89 (CBE), dated 25-7-1989. The Government of India's decision relates to Ethelene gas which is also used as a refrigerant in the manufacture of chemicals. The ratio of order-in-appeal No. 186/91 (CBE) was also subsequently followed by order-in-appeal No. 244/91 (CBE) dated 26-9-1991 in respect of the same M/s. Chemicals and Plastics India Ltd., for subsequent period. In view of the Government of India's decision referred to above followed by subsequent orders-in-appeal, there appears to be no objection to allow Modvat credit in respect of refrigerant used in the manufacturing process without which the final product cannot be manufactured. According to the appellants, METRON-22 is same as MAFFRON-22. Even otherwise, since both are refrigerants, the ratio applicable to M/s. Chemicals and Plastics India Ltd. will also apply to the appellants, since the disputed input in the instant case is also a refrigerant.
We also note that the W.R.B. in the case of Kopran Ltd. v. C.C.E.reported in 1993(67) E.L.T. 377 (Tri.) dealing with the liquid nitrogen has observed as under : "Liquid Nitrogen is needed for creating a proper atmosphere (both chilling and inert atmosphere) in the reactor vessel and if it is not used, chemical reaction process will be affected. Only in case of these two specified final products, for achieving the required efficiency of reaction, liquid nitrogen is purged in the reactor vessel. Though liquid nitrogen cannot be accorded the status of raw material participating in chemical reaction, it is a consumable essentially required for ensuring proper chemical reaction to take place in the reaction vessel. It is not an item required for operational need of the reactor vessel. Thus Modvat credit is available in respect of liquid nitrogen." 4. We, therefore, in the above circumstances hold that the impugned order is sustainable in law and on facts and this view the appeal is dismissed.