GEEP INDUSTRIAL SYNDICATE LTD. ETC. versus COLLECTOR OF CENTRAL EXCISE, ALLAHABAD

Citation: [1997] 1 S.C.R. 907 · Decided: 04-02-1997 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: B.P. JEEVAN REDDY · Disposal: Directions issued
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

GEEP INDUSTRIAL SYNDICATE LTD. ETC. 
v. 
COLLECTOR OF CENTRAL EXCISE, ALLAHABAD 
FEBRUARY 4, 1997 
[B.P. JEEVAN REDDY AND KS. PARIPOORNAN, JJ.] 
Excise Law: 
Central Excises ~nd Salt Act, 1944: Section 4(4)(d)(i). 
Excise dutj-Packing-"Value" of-In computing value of goods pack-
ed-Test detennination of-Batteries and torches were initially packed in 
small boxes which were packed in medium size cartons and which, in tum, 
A 
B 
c 
were packed in ''7-ply conugated carlons"-Held: Test was to determine 
whether packing provided at the time of delivery of the goods at the gate was 
necessary for th i purpose of putting them in a condition in which they were D 
generally sold in the wholesale market at the factory gate-In the instant case, 
packing was necessary only for protecting goods from damage-Hence, "value" 
of packing not liable to be included in value of said goods. 
Excise duty-f'acking-"Value" of--bt computing value of goods pack-
E 
ed-Onus to establish-Held: Is on the manufacturer. 
Words and Phrases: 
"Value''-Meaning of-fn the context of S.4(4)(d)(i) of the Central 
Excises and Salt Act, 1944. 
F 
The appellant-assessee was engaged in the manufacture of batteries 
and torches. These goods were initially packed in small boxes, which were 
packed in medium size cartons, The medium size cartons were, in turn, 
packed in larger corrugated cartons, called "7-ply corrugated cartons." The G 
Central Excise and Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal held that the value 
of the "7 ·ply corrugated cartons" was liable to be included in the value of 
the goods packed under Section 4(4)(d)(i) of the Central Excises and Salt 
Act, 1944. Being aggrieved the appellant preferred the present appeal. 
Allowing the appeal, this Court 
H 
' 
907 
908 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[1997] 1 S.C.R. 
A 
HELD: 1.1. Whatever packing is provided at the time of delivery of 
the goods at the gate is the packing necessary for the purpose of putting 
the excisable-articles in the condition in which they are generally sold in 
the wholesale market at the factory gate. Unless the manufacturer estab-
lishes that a particular packing, provided at the time of such delivery, was 
B not really necessary for that purpose, the value of the packing cannot be 
excluded. [913-B] 
1.2. In the year 1986, in Geep Industrial Syndicate relating to this 
very assessee herein, this Court held that packing in wooden boxes was not 
necessary for putting the articles in the condition in which they are 
c generally sold in the wholesale market at the factory gate and that it was 
done only for the purpose of protecting them from damage during the 
course of transport, i.e., transport after delivery. The 7-ply corrugated 
cartons have now taken the place of wooden boxes. But for this, there is 
no change in the factual situation since 1986. In such a factual situation, 
D 
it would not be permissible to arrive at a different conclusion than the one 
arrived at in 1986. [913-D-E] 
Geep J.ndustrial Syndicate Ltd. v. Union of India, (1992) ELT 328; 
Government of India v. Madras Rubber Factory Ltd., [1995] 4 SCC 349 and 
CCE v. Ponds (India) Ltd., [1989] 4 sec 759, relied on. 
E 
Union of India v. Bombay Tyre International, [1984] 1 SCC 467 and 
Union of India v. Godfrey Phillips India Ltd., [1985] 4 sec 369, referred 
to. 
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 4608-12 
F 
of 1996 Etc. 
From the Judgment and Order dated 18.10.95 and 6.11.95 of the 
Customs, Excise and Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi in 
Appeal Nos. E/2361-62/92-A and E/2796/93-A and E/1261/94-A, 962/95-A 
(Final Order No. 532-534/95-A and 695-96 of 1995-A. 
G 
Soli J. Sorabjee, V. Lakshmikumaran, V. Balachandran and Ms. 
Nisha Bagchi for the Appellants in C.A. Nos. 4608-12 and 4960/96 and 
Respondent in C.A. No. 14407/96. 
M. Gaurishankar Murthi, G. Prakash and V.K. Verma for the 
H Respondents in C.A. No. 4608-12/96,.4960/96 and Appellants in C.A. No. 
J-
--'---
...(-
~ 
,. 
)-
~ 
GEEP INDL. SYNDICATE v. COLI.ECTOR OF CENTI\ALEXCISE A!LAHBAD [B.P. JEEV AN REDDY, J.J909 
14407/96. 
A 
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by 
B.P. JEEVAN REDDY, J. These appeals are preferred against the 
orders of Central Excise and Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal. Civil 
Appeals No. 4608-4612 of 1996 and 4960 of 1996 are preferred by the B 
assessee, Geep Industrial Syndicate Limited, while Civil Appeal No. 14407 
of 1996 is preferred by the Revenue. Though preferred against different 
orders, the i
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.