MRP-based excise valuation unavailable for exempt packaged lipsticks, with Section 4A held inapplicable on settled authority.

Valuation of lipsticks of 10 gms or less could not be taken under Section 4A of the Central Excise Act, 1944 where the packages were exempt from MRP disclosure under Rule 34(1)(e) of the Standards of Weights and Measures (Packaged Commodities) Rules, 1977. The settled line of authority, including the Larger Bench decision in Urison Cosmetics Ltd. and later Tribunal rulings, was applied to hold that absence of a statutory requirement to display MRP prevented resort to Section 4A on that basis. On the facts stated, valuation was therefore not exigible under Section 4A and the assessees succeeded.

---

---

Issues: Whether the valuation of lipsticks of 10 gms or less was to be determined under Section 4 or Section 4A of the Central Excise Act, 1944, where the packages were exempt from displaying MRP under Rule 34(1)(e) of the Standards of Weights and Measures (Packaged Commodities) Rules, 1977.

Analysis: The issue was treated as settled by the Larger Bench decision in Urison Cosmetics Ltd. and subsequent Tribunal decisions following the same view. The governing principle applied was that, where the statutory requirement of MRP display was absent because of the applicable exemption, valuation could not proceed on the basis of Section 4A merely for that reason, and the matter was to be decided consistently with the settled line of authority.

Conclusion: The valuation was not exigible under Section 4A on the facts stated, and the appellants succeeded.

---