TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1984 (5) TMI 244
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....-list effective from 27-9-1974, disclosing a price for wholesale dealers "of grey pyramid Brand Portland Cement of specific surface more than 3,500 cm2/g (Superfine cement)" in a sum of Rs. 240/- ex-works plus packing charges in a sum of Rs. 50/- per tonne and handling and forwarding charges in a sum of Rs. 13/- per tonne (not the subject matter of the instant proceeding); (b) on receipt of the said price-list, the appropriate officer had queried on 29-1-1975 if the aforesaid superfine cement was capable of being delivered without suffering discolouration or deterioration in quality without the protection of suitable packing; (c) in reply the Appellant had, on 1st February, 1975, categorically stated that "normally cement should not b....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....etric tonne; (g) the appropriate officer had relied upon a trade notice dated 23-1-1970 to the effect that the assessable value should be inclusive of packing charges in case the cement is likely to deteriorate if unpacked, as well as the Appellant's clarification in the letters dated 1st and 2nd February, 1975; (h) on Appeal the Appellate Collector held, inter alia, that the superfine variety of cement was sold, so far, in a packed condition only and consequently the packing charges should be included in the assessable value; (i) the instant proceeding is the sequel. 2. It is contended for the Appellant in the Appeal, inter alia, that - (a) the cement in question is in no way different from ordinary grey portland cement....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e assessable value of the cement in question. 3. At the outset, Shri Gopal Prasad, the learned Consultant appearing for the Appellant, sought adjournment of the case, so as to await the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in other similar matters as well as certain clarifications on the issue of "durable and returnable packing" expected to be made on the reopening of the Court after long vacation. We were disinclined to accede to this request, since, in our opinion, (a) the issue of primary packing, arising in this case, is already decided by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Union of India & Ors. v. Bombay Tyre International Ltd. etc. (reported in 1983 ECR 1627 = 1983 E.L.T. 1896); (b) even if it may be that the issu....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e goods are made marketable for the ordinary consumer that has necessarily to be included within the assessable value, regardless of whatever directives may have been issued heretofore in various circulars issued from time to time or stray sales in bulk at the place of removal or the degree of deterioration in the various varieties of cement if sold unpacked. 6. In so far as cement is concerned, ordinarily, it is inconceivable of a sale to the consumer without primary packing. This has even been conceded by the Appellant in the two letters dated 1st February, 1975 and 2nd February, 1975. 7. In the premises, we see no reason to interfere with the order of the Appellate Collector. The Appeal is accordingly dismissed. EDITOR....