https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=41828 The Supreme Court clarified that for packing to be considered "returnable" under Section 4(4)(d)(i) of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944, it must be capable of being returned under a specific arrangement between the buyer and the assessee. Physical capability alone is insufficient. As there was no evidence of an arrangement for wholesale buyers to return the packing to the petitioner, the Excise Authorities were correct in not excluding the packing cost from the assessable value. Consequently, the Special Leave Petition was rejected. en-us Tue, 04 Nov 1986 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 12 Jan 2015 11:54:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=41828 The Supreme Court clarified that for packing to be considered "returnable" under Section 4(4)(d)(i) of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944, it must be capable of being returned under a specific arrangement between the buyer and the assessee. Physical capability alone is insufficient. As there was no evidence of an arrangement for wholesale buyers to return the packing to the petitioner, the Excise Authorities were correct in not excluding the packing cost from the assessable value. Consequently, the Special Leave Petition was rejected. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 04 Nov 1986 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=41828