M. Gouri Shankar Murthy, Member (J)

1. The facts, in brief, in this Revision Petition under Section 36 of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 (hereinafter referred to as the Act), transferred to the Tribunal and heard as an appeal, in terms of Section 35P of the Act or-

(a) the Appellant manufactured various qualities of the tread rubber and repair compound, falling under Item 16-A(2) of the First Schedule to the Act during the relevant period ;

(b) as would appear from the adjudication order, in the price-list filed prior to 15.9.75, the Appellant had indicated the wholesale price at which the goods were sold through sales depots at Madras, Vijayawada and Kolhapur;

(c) on or about 15-9-75, the Appellant filed a price-list in proforma Part V meant for excisable goods sold in retail for the purpose of valuation in terms of the amended Section 4 of the Act, which was to come into effect from 1-10-1975, showing, inter-alia, selling expenses, cost of transportation, etc. apart from what was claimed to be the price of goods wholly sold in retail;

(d) it was claimed that the goods in question were sold in retail through sales depots at Madras, Vijayawada and Kolhapur. Consequently, th