Direct sale by manufacturer is not retail sale; MRP labeling was unnecessary and exemption remained available.

Direct supply of cement by a manufacturer to customers, without any retail agency or intermediary, was treated as a sale outside the packaged commodities concept of retail sale. On that basis, affixing MRP/RSP was not required, and exemption under Notification No. 4/2006-C.E. could not be denied merely because the goods were sold to individual customers. The note also records that an earlier identical view existed, and absence of a Supreme Court stay did not justify keeping the matter in abeyance. The exemption was therefore available on the stated facts.

---

---

Issues: Whether cement supplied directly by the manufacturer to customers without involving any retail agency or intermediary, and without affixing MRP/RSP, qualifies as retail sale so as to deny exemption under Notification No. 4/2006-C.E. dated 01.03.2006.

Analysis: The supply was made directly to customers by the manufacturer, with no retail agency or other intermediary involved. On that factual basis, the transaction did not answer the definition of retail sale under the applicable packaged commodities framework. Where the sale is direct and not for resale, MRP/RSP affixation is not required, and the exemption could not be denied merely because the goods were sold to individual customers. The same view had already been taken in an identical matter, and the absence of any stay by the Supreme Court did not justify keeping the matter in abeyance.

Conclusion: The direct sales were not retail sales for the purpose of denying the exemption, and the appellant was entitled to the benefit of Notification No. 4/2006-C.E. dated 01.03.2006.

---