ORDER
R. Jayaraman, Member (T)
1. Both the appeal as well as the stay petition are proposed to be disposed of by this common order, in view of the fact that the grounds canvased by both the sides fall within a short compas, which are adequate for disposal of the appeal itself.
2. The appellants are engaged in the manufacture of dry battery cells. They have declared ‘cadmium’ as a raw material/component used in the manufacture of dry battery cell and claimed exemption in respect of duty paid on cadmium under Notification No. 201/79. However, the department alleged that cadmium is mixed with zinc, from which zinc callots are made and hence only zinc callots are the final product. However, these zinc callots are captively consumed for conversion into cans for dry battery cells. The Assistant Collector denied the exemption and passed the order-in-original, against which the appellants filed an appeal, which was rejected by the Commissioner (Appeals). Hence the present appeal before the Tribunal.
3. After hearing both the sides, there is no dispute before me that cadmium is essential for the manufacture of cans for dry battery cells. In fact the presence of cadmium in the dry battery cells cannot be disputed in the circumstance. Zinc callots may be occurring at the intermediate stage, which go into the manufacture of cans, which in turn are used in the manufacture of dry battery cells. It is a settled law that a part of a part is also a part of the main product, expecially when it cannot be disputed that cadmium forms part of dry battery cells. It has to be construed as a component of the final product namely dry battery cell as per declaration. Hence Notification No. 201/79 is available. I, therefore, allow the appeal.
Since the appeal itself is disposed of, stay application does not survive for consideration and the same is also treated as disposed of.