Cement export classification under Notification No. 4/2006-C.E. turned on whether MRP disclosure was required on bagged consignments.

Cement cleared in 50 kg bags for export to Nepal was examined under Notification No. 4/2006-C.E. The core issue was whether such goods fell under Sl. No. 1A, which applies to cement in packaged form where MRP declaration is required, or under Sl. No. 1C, which applies to cement other than packaged form. Because export consignments were not required under the Standards of Weights and Measures regime to declare MRP or other particulars, the third proviso to Sl. No. 1C supported concessional treatment even though MRP was printed on the bags. The Bench treated the appellants' claim as prima facie strong and granted waiver of pre-deposit with stay of recovery.

---

---

Issues: Whether the appellants had made out a prima facie case for waiver of pre-deposit and stay of recovery on the question whether cement cleared in 50 kg bags for export to Nepal, on which MRP was not required to be declared, was classifiable and dutiable under Sl. No. 1C rather than Sl. No. 1A of Notification No. 4/2006-C.E.

Analysis: Cement was cleared for export to Nepal in bags, but there was no requirement under the Standards of Weights and Measures regime to declare MRP and other particulars on such export consignments. Sl. No. 1A of Notification No. 4/2006-C.E. applies to cement cleared in packaged form where MRP declaration is required, whereas Sl. No. 1C applies to cement other than that cleared in packaged form. The third proviso to Sl. No. 1C supported treatment of goods as other than packaged form where retail sale price was not required to be declared and was not declared. On that basis, the printed MRP did not displace the applicable concessional treatment, and the Bench also noted that a similar prima facie view had been taken earlier in the appellants' own case.

Conclusion: The appellants established a prima facie case; pre-deposit of duty and interest was waived and recovery stayed.

---