Packing material deduction fails where charges are not separately specified and charged in the sale bill.

The SC held that the value of packing material could not be excluded from taxable turnover where the dealer did not separately specify and charge the packing price. The statutory deduction for packing and delivery charges applied only if those amounts were shown separately and were not included in the sale price of the goods. Because the bills did not distinguish the price of chewing tobacco from the packing material, and there was no express or implied contract for a separate sale of the packing material, the deduction conditions were not met. The value of the packing material therefore remained part of the taxable turnover.

---

---

Issues: Whether the value of packing material used for chewing tobacco could be excluded from taxable turnover when the dealer did not separately specify and charge the price of the packing material.

Analysis: The statutory deduction for charges relating to packing and delivery applied only when such amounts were specified and charged separately, without being included in the price of the goods sold. On the facts, the bills did not show separate prices for the chewing tobacco and the packing material. There was also no express or implied contract showing a separate sale of the packing material independent of the tobacco. In these circumstances, the conditions of the rule were not satisfied and the value of the packing material could not be deducted.

Conclusion: The claim for exclusion of the value of packing material was rejected and the issue was decided against the appellants.

Ratio Decidendi: A statutory deduction for packing-related charges is available only where such charges are separately specified and charged; absent such separate specification and charge, the value of packing material forms part of the taxable turnover.

---