https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=44648 The constitutional challenge to Section 4(4) of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 failed because the provision had already been upheld by the Supreme Court as within Parliament's legislative competence under Article 246 read with Entry 84 of the Union List. On valuation, secondary packing necessary to make Vanaspati marketable in wholesale trade formed part of the assessable value, so the cost of containers and packing charges could not be excluded from excise duty computation. The writ petition was therefore rejected on both grounds. en-us Wed, 04 Dec 1996 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 02 Jul 2010 16:51:11 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=44648 The constitutional challenge to Section 4(4) of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 failed because the provision had already been upheld by the Supreme Court as within Parliament's legislative competence under Article 246 read with Entry 84 of the Union List. On valuation, secondary packing necessary to make Vanaspati marketable in wholesale trade formed part of the assessable value, so the cost of containers and packing charges could not be excluded from excise duty computation. The writ petition was therefore rejected on both grounds. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 04 Dec 1996 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=44648