ORDER
D.C. Mandal, Member (T)
1. The appellants are manufacturers of fabricated mica falling under Item -68 of the Central Excise Tariff. By Notification No. 179/77-C.E., dated 18-6-1977, the goods falling under Item 68 of C.E.T. manufactured without the aid of power were wholly exempted from Central Excise duty. During the period from 21-3-1982 to 17-4-1982 the appellants used a lighted table for checking the fabricated mica. The surface of the table was semi-transparent. The table was fitted with tube light. Mica was spread over the table and light passed through the mica films. Collector of Central Excise held that checking the mica films was a part of manufacturing process in relation to manufacture of fabricated mica and since power was used for this part of the process of manufacturing during the period 21-3-1982 to 17-4-1982 the benefit of exemption Notification 179/77-C.E. was not admissible to the goods in question manufactured during that period. He, therefore, held that the appellants were liable to pay duty for that period under Rule 9(2) of the C.E. Rules, 1944.
2. We have heard Shri Abraham for the appellants and Shri Sunder Rajan for the respondent. Shri Abraham reiterated the grounds of the appeal. The main contention of the appellants is that “the final product of fabricated mica was completely manufactured before put to sorting and grading and ultimate packing for export”. Checking the mica in the lighted table for sorting and grading is not a part of manufacture. The second ground of appeal is that according to Section 2(g) of the Factories Act, 1948. Power means electric energy, or any other form of energy which is mechanically transmitted and not generated by human or animal agency. For an energy to become “power” it is necessary that the same is transmitted by mechanical process. In this view, the tube light fitted to the table has not been transmitted by any mechanical process. Since the term power has not been defined in the Central Excises and Salt Act, the definition laid down in the Factories Act should be followed and according to this definition the lighting of the table for checking the mica is not use of power for the manufacture of fabricated mica. Shri Sunder Rajan has argued supporting the Collector’s Order and has relied upon the judgments reported in 1987(28) ELT 56 (S.C.) : 1985(21) ELT 200 (Tribunal). He has argued that the present case is covered by these decisions in favour of the respondent. In these cases it was held that cutting of steel wires and treatment of paper is a process of manufacture for fireworks under Section 2(f) of the Central Excises and Salt Act.
3. We have considered the arguments during the hearing and have gone through the records of the case. In the appeal memorandum, the appellants have stated that they secured an export order from the Russian Government and to satisfy the Russian Inspectors about their method of sorting and grading of export quality goods alter the manufacturing process was completed they made one table fitted with tube light and trained the worker for sorting and grading manufactured mica for export. However, their general practice was to do this sorting and grading in the day light only. It has also been stated that after the goods were inspected by the Russian Inspector, the table was dispensed with on 17-4-1982 and never used thereafter. We find from the impugned order that the Collector has seen a voucher dated 20-3-1982 to the effect that the lighted table had been got manufactured by the appellants at a particular time and the Collector has accepted the submission that the table was used for a limited period from 21-3-1982 to 17-4-1982. The facts of the case show that the fabricated mica was fully manufactured before the same was tested for sorting and grading. The use of the lighted table for sorting and grading does not amount to the process of manufacture. This being the position, there is no justification to come to the conclusion that during the short period from 21-3-1982 to 17-4-1982, the use of lighted table for sorting and grading fabricated mica amounted to manufacture with the aid of power. In the circumstances, the impugned order has to be set aside and the appeal allowed. We order accordingly.