https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=172350 Valuation of lipsticks of 10 gms or less could not be taken under Section 4A of the Central Excise Act, 1944 where the packages were exempt from MRP disclosure under Rule 34(1)(e) of the Standards of Weights and Measures (Packaged Commodities) Rules, 1977. The settled line of authority, including the Larger Bench decision in Urison Cosmetics Ltd. and later Tribunal rulings, was applied to hold that absence of a statutory requirement to display MRP prevented resort to Section 4A on that basis. On the facts stated, valuation was therefore not exigible under Section 4A and the assessees succeeded. en-us Mon, 17 Dec 2007 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 18 Sep 2017 10:28:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=172350 Valuation of lipsticks of 10 gms or less could not be taken under Section 4A of the Central Excise Act, 1944 where the packages were exempt from MRP disclosure under Rule 34(1)(e) of the Standards of Weights and Measures (Packaged Commodities) Rules, 1977. The settled line of authority, including the Larger Bench decision in Urison Cosmetics Ltd. and later Tribunal rulings, was applied to hold that absence of a statutory requirement to display MRP prevented resort to Section 4A on that basis. On the facts stated, valuation was therefore not exigible under Section 4A and the assessees succeeded. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 17 Dec 2007 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=172350