1996 (9) TMI 391 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues:
1. Whether the appellants had the right to fix different prices for the same product, "Erasmic Lather Shaving Cream," with and without a free blades packet.
2. Whether the reduced prices declared by the appellants for the product with the free blades packet were valid under Section 4 of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944.
3. Whether the appellants were justified in reducing the price of the product "detergent powder" along with a plastic bucket and whether the reduced price was acceptable.

Analysis:
1. The case involved a dispute regarding the pricing of "Erasmic Lather Shaving Cream" (ELSC) by the appellants. The appellants had reduced the price of ELSC by providing a free blades packet along with it, leading to objections from the authorities that there cannot be two prices for the same excisable product. The appellants argued that ELSC with the free blades packet was a different product from ELSC sold prior to the promotional scheme and thus, they had the right to fix different prices for the two versions of the product.

2. The appellants contended that Section 4 of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 does not regulate the prices of excisable goods, and they are free to sell at the price they choose. They argued that unless there is evidence of a flow-back or additional consideration influencing the price, the reduced price declared by them should be accepted. The Tribunal agreed with the appellants, noting that there was no evidence of simultaneous clearance of both versions of ELSC during the relevant period, and hence, the reduced price should not be discarded.

3. Additionally, the case involved a similar issue with "detergent powder" being sold at a reduced price along with a plastic bucket. The appellants argued that the reduced price was valid as no flow-back or additional consideration influenced the price. The Tribunal allowed the appeal related to the detergent powder as well, as no other issues were involved in that particular case.

Conclusion:
The Tribunal allowed the appeals in favor of the appellants, stating that the reduced prices declared by them for the products with additional items were valid under Section 4 of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944. The Tribunal emphasized that unless there is evidence of flow-back or additional consideration affecting the price, the declared reduced prices should be accepted.