JUDGMENT

SABYASACHI MUKHARJI, J.—(Concurring with Venkatachaliah, J.) :- I have had the advantage of reading in draft the judgment proposed to be delivered by my learned brother Venkatachaliah, J. I respectfully agree with him. There is, however, one aspect of the matter in respect of which I would like to say a few words. Contention (e) as noted by my learned brother in his judgment deals with the determination of the assessable-value. The processors in the cases before us say that they have filed classification lists under R. 173-B of the Central Excises and Salt Rules. 1944, as they had no other choice and that if the proper principles of determination of the assessable-value do not legally justify the consequences flowing from the classification it is open to them to contend against the validity of the determination and they are not estopped from doing so. The processors are right in contending that the true principle should be followed in determining the assessable-value. Then what is the true principle ? Section 4 of the Act deals with the valuation of excisable goods for purposes of charging of duty of excise. Section 4(1)(a) of the Act stipulates that the value should be, s