In Brief
A footwear manufacturer sold products in bulk to defense and paramilitary forces under a contract, affixing MRP stickers to claim excise duty concessions meant for retail sales. The tax authority challenged this, arguing the sale was not a retail sale within the meaning of Section 4(A) of the Central Excise Act. The Supreme Court held that goods qualify for these benefits only if they satisfy five cumulative conditions, including a legal mandate to affix MRP. Since institutional buyers are exempt from metrology rules and act as intermediaries (not final consumers), no such mandate existed. Mere MRP affixation without legal requirement does not suffice. The Court allowed the appeal, requiring the respondent to pay the differential tax amount.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.