MRP-based valuation depends on packaging law requirements for separately cleared food processor accessories and may fall under transaction value.

Food processor accessories cleared separately were said to attract MRP-based valuation only if the packaged commodity rules required declaration of retail sale price on those packages. The article notes that section 4A applies where goods are notified for MRP valuation and the metrology law mandates MRP disclosure; otherwise transaction value under section 4 may apply. It also records that notified commodities may be valued partly under section 4A and partly under section 4 depending on the statutory packaging requirement. As no clarification had been obtained from the Legal Metrology authorities on the accessories as cleared, the matter required factual verification and was remanded for fresh determination.

---

---

Issues: Whether food processor accessories cleared in separate packages, and not with the main food processor unit, were liable to valuation under section 4A on the basis of retail sale price, or under section 4 on transaction value.

Analysis: Section 4A applies only where the goods are specified for MRP-based valuation and there is a statutory requirement under the metrology law to declare the retail sale price on the package. The dispute therefore turned on whether the accessories, when cleared separately, were required to bear MRP under the applicable packaged commodity rules. The circular relied upon by the Tribunal recognized that even a notified commodity may be partly assessed under section 4A and partly under section 4 depending on the statutory requirement. Since neither side had obtained clarification from the Legal Metrology authorities on whether MRP declaration was mandatory for the accessories in the form cleared, the matter required factual verification before the valuation issue could be finally answered.

Conclusion: The issue could not be finally decided on the existing record and was sent back for fresh determination after obtaining the opinion of the Legal Metrology Department.

---