METAL BOX INDIA LIMITED vs THE COLLECTOR OF CENTRAL EXCISE, MADRAS

The Supreme Court held that under Section 4(1)(a) of the Central Excise and Salt Act, 1944, the notional rate of interest on advances made by a buyer to a manufacturer must be included in the assessable value of goods to reflect the correct price. The Court affirmed the Tribunal's decision to reject the manufacturer's claim for deductions of rebates and discounts given to the buyer, stating that such concessions do not contravene trade practices. The Court also addressed the limitation period under Section 11A, ruling that the revenue was justified in invoking the five-year period for duty assessment.