C.T.A. Pillai, Member (T)

1. As the two appeals arise from out of a single order No. 39/82 dated 30-11-82 of the Assistant Collector of Central Excise, Rajahmundry and involve similar issues they are being disposed of by this common order.

2. By order dated 30-11-82 the Asst. Collector of Central Excise, Rajahmundry disallowed a claim of the appellants for grant of benefit of Notification No. 201/79 dated 4-6-1979 in respect of the following items :-

(i) Alumina Ferric;

(ii) Sodium Sulphate;

(iii) China Clay;

(iv) Glue powder;

(v) Soap stone powder;

(vi) Rosin;

(vii) Acetic Acid;

(viii) Sulphuric acid powder (clarified as sulphamic acid powder); and

(ix) Alfoc powder,

on a finding that a raw material claimed to be used in the manufacture it should be found in the analysis of the final finished product. He, however, allowed the claim in respect of burnt lime. The appellants went in appeal to the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals), Madras against the refusal to grant the benefit in respect of all the items other than the Burnt Lime. That authority observed that though the nine items are no doubt used in the manufacture of paper, they do not constitute raw material of paper, as paper can