2000 (5) TMI 108

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....invoked to cover cases of different packaging meant for different class of buyers showing separate MRP. In view of the above facts, the impugned order is not sustainable and accordingly is set aside". Being aggrieved by this order, Revenue has filed the captioned appeal. 2. The facts of the case in brief are that the respondents herein are engaged in the manufacture of detergent powder. During the period 12-1-1998 to 18-2-1998, they had two MRPs for their products, "Wheel" Detergent Powder, packed in two different packaging of one kg. each. On one MRP shown was Rs. 17/- per kg. and on the other which was meant for Canteen Supply, the MRP shown was Rs. 16.15 per kg. The question to be decided is whether both the MRPs can be accepted and du....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....es were the same but there were two MRPs; that since the contents were the same, there cannot be different MRPs for the same excisable goods; that the contention of the respondent herein that the CSD was a special class of buyer was not acceptable since there was no scope of different class of buyers under Section 4A which is independent section having no relation with Section 4 of the Act. Ld. DR, therefore, prayed that the appeal may be allowed. 4. Shri P.K. Mittal, ld. Counsel appearing for the respondent submitted that the respondents were selling goods to general public as well as CSD; that the price for general public for one kg. of "Wheel" Detergent Powder was Rs. 17/- whereas the price for CSD was Rs. 16.15 per kg; that a simple r....