Just a moment...
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, under the unamended Section 4 of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944, the cost of packing dry cell batteries was includible in their assessable value for levy of central excise duty.
Analysis: The assessable value under the old Section 4 was to be determined by reference to the wholesale cash price at the time of removal, and the charging provision had to be construed on the footing that only manufacturing cost and manufacturing profit were relevant. The packing of the dry cell batteries in cartons and wooden cases was found to be a post-manufacturing step done for convenience, protection and transport, and not a process that completed manufacture. The view was also taken that, where two reasonable interpretations of a taxing provision are possible, the construction favourable to the subject should be adopted, particularly where the contrary view was not supported by any conflicting authority.
Conclusion: The cost of packing was not includible in the assessable value under the old Section 4, and the additional excise demand based on packing charges was unsustainable.
Final Conclusion: The petitions succeeded, the impugned additional demands were quashed, and refund of amounts recovered under those demands was directed.
Ratio Decidendi: Under the unamended excise valuation provision, post-manufacturing packing charges are not part of assessable value where manufacture of the goods is already complete before packing.