https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=40634 The court held that the definition of "value" under Section 4(4)(d) of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944, does not empower Parliament to include the cost of packing materials in the assessable value of excisable goods. It was deemed beyond legislative competence and violative of the Constitution. The court directed the respondents to refund the excess duty collected from the petitioner, reimburse costs incurred, and pay interest on the refundable amount. The rule was made absolute in favor of the petitioner. en-us Mon, 09 Apr 1979 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 12 May 2010 12:49:11 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=40634 The court held that the definition of "value" under Section 4(4)(d) of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944, does not empower Parliament to include the cost of packing materials in the assessable value of excisable goods. It was deemed beyond legislative competence and violative of the Constitution. The court directed the respondents to refund the excess duty collected from the petitioner, reimburse costs incurred, and pay interest on the refundable amount. The rule was made absolute in favor of the petitioner. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 09 Apr 1979 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=40634