( 1 ). In this case the respondent manufactures writing paper. He also manufactures the wrapping paper, which is utilised for wrapping the writing papers sold by him. There is no dispute that the wrapping paper which is utilised in wrapping writing papers for sale in the wholesale market will have to be included in the value of the goods. This point is put beyond any doubt by the judgment of this court in the case of CCE v. Ponds India Ltd. Sabyasachi Mukharji, J. (as His Lordship then was), expressed the view:

"in my opinion, the views expressed by the majority of the judges in Godfrey Philips case were in consonance with the views of 66 this court in the Bombay Tyre International case. The question is not for what purpose a particular kind of packing is done but the test is whether a particular packing is done in order to put the goods in the condition in which they are generally sold in the wholesale market at the factory gate and if they are generally sold in the wholesale market at the factory gate in certain packed condition, whatever may be the reason for such packing, the cost of such packing would be includible in the value of the goods for assessment to excise duty. "his Lordship further held:

"12. In my opinion, the correct position seems to be that the cost of that much of packings, be they primary or secondary, which are required to make the articles marketable would be includible in the value. How much packing is necessary to make the goods marketable is a question of fact to be determined by application of the correct approach. Packing, which is primarily done or mainly done for protecting the goods, and not for making the goods marketable should not be included. The question is not whether these goods could be so sold, hut the question is whether these goods are. so sold usually and as such used to become marketable in such manner. "

( 2 ). This principle laid down by Sabyasachi Mukharji, J. was applied in the case of Govt. of India v. Madras Rubber Factory Ltd.

( 3 ). In the instant case, writing paper is being sold in a packet. The value of the packing will have to be included if the packing is done in order to put the goods in a marketable condition for being sold in the wholesale market. It is not the case of the respondent that the goods are generally placed in the wholesale market without any wrapping. The question is whether these goods are usually wrapped for making them marketable. It is not the case of the appellant that the goods are usually sold unwrapped in the wholesale market. In the facts of this case and having regard to the principle laid down by Mukharji, J. in the aforesaid case of Ponds India Ltd. the value of the wrapping paper will have to be added to the value of the writing paper sold by the manufacturer.

( 4 ). On behalf of the manufacturer, a point has been taken that although the value of the wrapping paper may be included, the manufacturer is entitled to claim relief on account of the duty which was already paid on this wrapping paper. The wrapping papers were not bought from the market, but were manufactured by the manufacturer himself. When he manufactured the wrapping paper even though for internal consumption, he paid duty. Thereafter the wrapping paper is used for wrapping the writing papers for the purpose of selling the writing papers in the wholesale market. In ascertaining the value of the goods that was being sold by the manufacturer, deduction has to be made of the duty already paid on the wrapping papers. For this purpose our attention was drawn to Ss. (4 (d) (i) and (ii) of Section 4 of the central Excise Act: "4. (4 (d) value in relation to any excisable goods,-

(I) where the goods are delivered at the time of removal in a packed condition, includes the cost of such packing except the cost of the packing which is of a durable nature and is returnable by the buyer to the assessee.

(II) does not include the amount of the duty of excise, sales tax and other taxes, if any, pay