TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2007 (10) TMI 101
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....on assessable value determined under Section 4 of the Central Excise Act. During most part of the period, they had also cleared Chick Kali Mehendi Power Hair Dye on payment of duty likewise. The "Indica" hair dye was cleared in mono-cartons, each containing 6 sachets of 8 grams each of the commodity. The other hair dye was also cleared in mono-cartons, but each containing 10 sachets of 4 grams each of the commodity. All the clearances were made to a dealer namely M/s. Cavinkare Pvt. Ltd. The appellant considered each sachet as a retail pack and, as the net weight of hair dye contained therein was less than 20 grams, they claimed exemption (under Rule 34(1)(b) of the Standards of Weights and Measures (Packaged Commodities) Rules, 1977) from ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r replies to the show-cause notices, submitted that the hair dyes in sachets were marketable as such without mono-carton, that what was intended for retail sale was the sachet pack and not the mono-carton pack, that Rules 6 and 17of the Standards of Weights and Measures (Packaged Commodities) Rules [SWM (PC) Rules, for short] were not applicable to the sachet packs of the hair dyes and these packs were exempt, under Rule 34(1)(b) of the said Rules, from declaration of weight and retail sale price. In their reply to the first show-cause notice, they also expressed their apprehension that the show-cause notice had been issued in pursuance of CBEC's Circular No. 492/58/99 dated 2.11.1999 which dealt with dutiability of multi-piece packages und....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....proceedings. However, the SDR submitted that, on an issue identical to the one involved in the instant case, the South Zonal Bench, Bangalore, had disagreed with the West Zonal Bench, Mumbai and had referred the issue to a larger Bench in the case of Roys Industries Ltd. Vs. CCE, Hyderabad [2006 (201) ELT 609 (Tri. Bang.)]. The SDR wanted us to wait for the decision of the larger Bench. In this context, the Senior Advocate for the appellant pointed out that a larger Bench of the Tribunal had already answered identical issue in the case of CCE, Mumbai Vs. Urison Cosmetics Ltd. [2006-TIOL-354-CESTAT-MUM-LB]. We note that the reference in Urison Cosmetics case had been made in the wake of the High Court's decision in Varnica Herbs case [2004 (....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....noticing the statutory requirement of cosmetics having to be sold by weight or measure, recorded the finding that the article (hair dye) was not intended to be sold either by weight or by measure and had, on this basis, held that the exemption under Rule 34(1)(b) was not available to the goods. The larger Bench considered the relevant paragraph 15 of the High Court's judgment in paragraph 9 and 10 of its order in Urison Cosmetics (supra) as follows :- 9. For better appreciation, we reproduce below the relevant paragraph 15 of the decision in Varnica (supra):- "15. A perusal of these provisions makes it clear that articles kept in separate pouches by the petitioner can be termed as multi-piece package and such pouches can be said indiv....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ly Section 4A of the CEA will not have any application to such multi-packs. We are also of the view that the observation of the Honourable Madras High Court in Varnica (cited supra) to the effect that hair dyes are not intended to be sold by weight or measure cannot be taken as a binding precedent as it has been rendered per incuriam without noticing the legal provisions to the contrary which require such good to be sold by weight or volume." 9. The above larger Bench decision in Urison Cosmetics was followed by the West Zonal Bench (Mumbai) in the cases of CCE, Mumbai Vs. Charishma Cosmetics Pvt. Ltd. [2006 (201) ELT 564 (Tri. Mumbai)] and Alfa Packaging Vs. CCE, Vapi [2006 (204) ELT 506 (Tri. Mumbai)] cited befor....