MRP-based valuation of retail-packaged paints applies even when goods are supplied to industrial and institutional buyers.

Branded paints cleared in the same retail packages bearing MRP remained liable to valuation under section 4A of the Central Excise Act, 1944, even when supplied to industrial or institutional buyers under contract. The decisive factor was that the goods retained their character as marketable retail packages; supply to institutional customers did not change the valuation basis. The settled principle applied was that where packaged commodities are subject to MRP declaration, section 4A governs valuation rather than section 4. The valuation adopted by the Commissioner (Appeals) was upheld and the demand based on section 4 valuation did not survive.

---

---

Issues: Whether clearances of branded paints supplied in the same retail packs bearing MRP to industrial or institutional buyers were liable to be valued under section 4A of the Central Excise Act, 1944, or under section 4 of that Act.

Analysis: The goods supplied to industrial buyers were found to be the same retail packages sold in the market and bore MRP. The character of the goods did not change merely because the supplies were made to institutional customers under contract. In the light of the settled law that where packaged commodities remain marketable retail packages and are subject to MRP declaration, valuation is to proceed on the basis of section 4A, the cited precedents supporting valuation under MRP were held applicable.

Conclusion: The goods were correctly assessable under section 4A of the Central Excise Act, 1944 and not under section 4. The Revenue's appeal was therefore rejected.

Final Conclusion: The valuation adopted by the Commissioner (Appeals) was upheld and the demand based on section 4 valuation did not survive.

Ratio Decidendi: Where goods are cleared in the same retail packages bearing MRP, their supply to institutional or industrial buyers does not by itself exclude section 4A valuation.

---