Excise valuation must exclude post-manufacturing costs, even under amended valuation rules, unless the statute clearly says otherwise.

Excise valuation under Section 4 required the assessable value to reflect manufacturing cost and manufacturing profit, not post-manufacturing selling elements. For the unamended provision, sales to selling agents at the packing station were treated as genuine wholesale sales at the factory gate, and post-manufacturing expenses such as selling costs could be deducted subject to factual verification and proper apportionment. Under the amended provision, the same constitutional principle continued to apply: the amendment was read as addressing manipulative related-person sales, not as authorising inclusion of freight, octroi, insurance, service charges or other post-manufacturing expenses in assessable value absent clear legislative intent.

---

---

Issues: (i) whether, for assessment under unamended Section 4 of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944, the price charged by the manufacturer to its selling agents at the packing station was the relevant wholesale cash price and whether post-manufacturing expenses could be deducted; (ii) whether, after the amendment to Section 4, the normal price could be taken from sales through related persons and whether freight, octroi, insurance, selling expenses and service charges remained deductible.

Analysis: For the pre-amendment period, the price charged to the selling agents at the packing stations was held to be genuine wholesale sale price at the factory gate. The transactions were found to be real wholesale sales and not colourable or manipulated merely because the agents also handled most of the distribution. The settled principle applied was that excise is a duty on manufacture, so the assessable value must reflect manufacturing cost and manufacturing profit and must exclude post-manufacturing elements such as selling cost and selling profit. On that basis, deductions attributable to post-manufacturing activity could be permitted, subject to verification of the factual basis and apportionment where an item, such as advertising or marketing expense, contained both manufacturing and selling components.

Conclusion: For the unamended section, the assessee succeeded in having the selling-agent price treated as the relevant wholesale cash price, with allowance for deduction of the post-manufacturing element of selling expenses.

Issue (ii): whether, under the amended Section 4, the declared normal price to or through related persons could be adopted without allowing deductions for post-manufacturing expenses.

Analysis: The amended provision was read in the light of the charging nature of excise duty and the constitutional entry under which the levy was imposed. The amendment was understood as directed mainly against manipulative sales through related persons and not as a radical enlargement of excise so as to include post-manufacturing cost and profit. The language of the amendment and its objects did not show an intention to tax selling cost as part of excise duty. The same principle continued to apply, so that freight, octroi, insurance and other post-manufacturing expenses could not be loaded into assessable value merely because the valuation was made under the amended section. At the same time, factual verification was required and items like service charges and selling expenses had to be examined for proper segregation between manufacturing and selling activity.

Conclusion: For the amended section, the normal price adopted by the department was sustained in principle, but the refusal to allow deductions for the post-manufacturing component of the claimed expenses was not sustained.

Final Conclusion: The valuation orders were quashed and the revisions were directed to be reheard, with the assessee entitled to have the assessable value reconsidered in accordance with the court's rulings on exclusion of post-manufacturing elements.

Ratio Decidendi: In valuation of excisable goods, the assessable value must exclude post-manufacturing costs and profits, and a statutory valuation provision will be read so as to remain confined to the constitutional concept of excise unless the legislature clearly enacts otherwise.

---