Just a moment...
Generate professional replies to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter.
Step 1 – Issue Identification & Review
The AI analyses your query, notice, order, or uploaded documents and identifies the key issues involved.
• Review the issues identified by the AI
• Add, edit, remove, or refine issues as required
Step 2 – Draft Generation
Once you approve the issues, the AI performs issue-wise legal research and prepares a structured draft response.
• Relevant statutory provisions
• Judicial precedents and Supreme Court, High Court and other citations
• Issue-wise legal analysis
• Practical arguments and supporting content
• Professionally structured draft ready for further review. 
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether hair dye cleared in sachets packed in a mono-carton fell within Rule 34 of the Standards of Weights and Measures (Packaged Commodities) Rules, 1977 so as to be of those Rules, and consequently liable to assessment under Section 4 of the Central Excise Act, 1944 rather than Section 4A of that Act.
Analysis: The goods were cleared in individual sachets of 6 gms. each, with six sachets placed in one mono-carton. Rule 34, as applicable during the relevant time, excluded packages containing commodities of less than 20 grams or 20 millilitres when sold by weight or measure. On the factual finding that each sachet was of 6 gms., the condition of Rule 34 stood satisfied. The mono-carton arrangement did not deprive the package of the exemption, and the reasoning in Krafttech Products was treated as applicable. The metrology opinion was not accepted because the adjudicating authority's factual finding regarding sachet weight and packing pattern governed the issue.
Conclusion: The goods were covered by Rule 34 and were not subject to the packaged commodities regime. They were therefore assessable under Section 4 of the Central Excise Act, 1944 and not under Section 4A of that Act.
Final Conclusion: The appeals succeeded, and the duty classification adopted by Revenue was set aside, with the penalty also falling along with the main relief.
Ratio Decidendi: Where individual units in a mono-carton satisfy the weight-based exemption under Rule 34, the package is of the packaged commodities rules and valuation must follow the general assessable value provision rather than the special retail sale valuation provision.