Retail sale price valuation under Section 4A fails where secondary packing is not meant for retail sale and units are exempt.

Section 4A of the Central Excise Act applies only where the goods are required to declare retail sale price under the packaged commodities rules and are covered by a section 4A notification. Glue sticks and correction pens cleared in secondary packing were held outside that regime because the packing was not shown to be a multi-piece package intended for retail sale, and the individual units fell within Rule 34 exemption from mandatory retail price declaration. The secondary packing itself did not bear retail sale price, so the demand based on section 4A could not be sustained.

---

---

Issues: Whether glue sticks and correction pens cleared in secondary packing were liable to be assessed under section 4A of the Central Excise Act, 1944 as retail sale price-based goods, or whether they fell outside that regime because the secondary packing was not a multi-piece package intended for retail sale and the individual packs were within the exemption in Rule 34 of the Standards of Weights and Measures (Packaged Commodities) Rules, 1977.

Analysis: Section 4A applies only where the goods are required under the Standards of Weights and Measures Act, 1976 and the rules made thereunder to declare retail sale price on the package, and the goods are also covered by a notification under section 4A. The Rules distinguish between retail packages, wholesale packages, and multi-piece packages, and Rule 17 requires additional declarations only where the package is intended for retail sale as such. The secondary packing in the present case did not bear retail sale price and there was no finding that it was intended to be sold to the ultimate consumer in that form. The individual sticks and pens inside the packing had their own declared value, but each unit was below the threshold prescribed by Rule 34 and therefore exempt from the mandatory retail price declaration. The decision of the first appellate authority was supported by the correct understanding of the statutory scheme and the contrary view rested on a misreading of the Rules and the nature of the packing.

Conclusion: Section 4A of the Central Excise Act, 1944 was not applicable to the disputed clearances, and the demand could not be sustained.

---