Misdeclaration of Maximum Retail Price on gas stoves was upheld on cartons, stamps and statements showing duty evasion.

Contemporaneous physical evidence, including cartons, rubber stamps and inquiry statements, was treated as sufficient to support misdeclaration of Maximum Retail Price on gas stoves and resultant duty evasion. The plea that no finished goods were seized, or that the goods were not found in cartons, was rejected because the cartons and stamps themselves indicated the declared MRP and the maintenance of different MRP markings for the same goods. The demand and related proceedings were therefore sustained, and the challenge failed.

---

---

Issues: Whether the demand and related proceedings based on alleged misdeclaration of Maximum Retail Price on gas stoves were sustainable on the basis of cartons, rubber stamps, and statements recorded by the department.

Analysis: Gas stoves were treated as goods requiring declaration of Maximum Retail Price on the packages, and the record showed that two sets of MRP stamps were found with the appellant. The cartons and stamps recovered from the factory, along with the statements recorded during the inquiry, were treated as material evidence of misdeclaration and evasion. The plea that no finished goods were seized or that the goods were not found in cartons was not accepted, since the cartons themselves were considered sufficient to indicate the declared MRP.

Conclusion: The finding of misdeclaration and duty evasion was upheld and the challenge to the demand failed.

Final Conclusion: The impugned order was sustained and the appeals were dismissed.

Ratio Decidendi: Where contemporaneous physical evidence and related statements show that a manufacturer maintained different MRP markings for the same goods, the demand based on misdeclaration of MRP and resultant duty evasion can be sustained even without seizure of saleable stock in the finished condition.

---