Excise valuation and trade discount must be applied consistently across a class of goods, not selectively denied without reconciliation.

Trade discount was relevant to excise valuation of footwear under Section 4 where the department had adopted a rough and ready average basis for the class of goods. The authorities could not apply a uniform 6% discount to the petitioner's footwear generally and then deny the same treatment to Miners' Boots without first reconciling that approach with the earlier Board order and the statutory valuation basis. On the record, the denial of trade discount was not sustainable; the impugned orders were quashed and the matter was remitted for fresh adjudication after considering the prior Board order and hearing the petitioner.

---

---

Issues: Whether trade discount was allowable in determining the assessable value of the footwear known as "Miners' Boots" under Section 4 of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944, and whether the excise authorities could disallow such discount while otherwise adopting an average basis of valuation.

Analysis: The valuation scheme adopted by the excise department had proceeded on a rough and ready average basis, allowing a 6% trade discount for the petitioner's footwear generally, including footwear sold through retail outlets, rather than assessing each lot strictly by the actual discount, if any, allowed on individual sales. The earlier orders of the Central Board of Revenue had recognised that footwear sold through different channels could still attract a trade discount component in assessment, and the record did not establish that Miners' Boots stood outside the class of footwear ordinarily manufactured by the petitioner. In these circumstances, the authorities could not consistently apply an average discount method to the petitioner's footwear as a whole and then deny that basis only to Miners' Boots without first examining the scope and effect of the earlier Board order of 2 May 1956.

Conclusion: The denial of trade discount on Miners' Boots was not sustainable on the record, and the impugned orders were quashed with a direction for fresh adjudication after considering the earlier Board order and giving the petitioner a hearing.

Ratio Decidendi: Where excise valuation is being applied on an average or uniform discount basis to a class of goods, the department cannot selectively deny the same discount to a particular item of that class without first reconciling the assessment with its own governing valuation orders and the statutory basis under Section 4.

---