BALIA, J. ( 1 ) ). All these eight petitions raise common questions and therefore, they are disposed of by this common judgment. ( 2 ) ). All the petitioners are importing Polyester Filament Yarn. The yarn is wounded on bobbins which are made either of iron or aluminium or paper. The yarn so imported is subject to levy of duty of customs under the Customs Act. The articles made of iron or aluminium or paper are also subject to duty of customs under separate items prescribed in the Schedule at different rates when imported. The precise question which is raised in these petitions is that when Polyester filament Yarn is imported wounded on bboins whether customs duty is leviable on the entire invoice price or be subjected to levy of customs duty under respective tariff items by dividing the invoice value of goods according to net value of yarn and bobbins independently. ( 3 ) ). Learned Counsel for the petitioners contends that bobbins are of durable character and can be refused or returned. Therefore, the bobbins, being an independent dutiable article, whether made of aluminium, or iron or paper, subject to levy of customs duty under the Act, are liable to be taxed separately and not as a part of yarn of its full invoice price. In other words, the petitioners contend that from the value of articels imported, shown in the invoice, that much value that may be attributable to the bobbins should be separated and the customs duty leviable on yarn should be levied only on the remainder of the invoice price and the value attributable to bobbins be taxed under respective tariff items applicable to them depending on the fact of which material they are made. This contention is founded on the premises that the entire invoice price is not attributable to cost of yarn, but part of it is attributable to cost of bobbins which is packing material. If the course suggested by the petitioners is not adopted, says the learned Counsel, it will result in double taxation of packing material and will result in fixing of packing material at a higher rate at which yarn is taxable. ( 4 ) ). Learned Counsel for the revenue Mr. H. M. Mehta, refuting the above contentions, urged that importing or selling of yarn without bobbins, is neither practical or possible. ( 4 ) ). Learned Counsel for the revenue Mr. H. M. Mehta, refuting the above contentions, urged that importing or selling of yarn without bobbins, is neither practical or possible. It is a general trade practice that the yarn is sold and delivered wounded on bobbins and it is one whole transaction. In such cases, value of packing material for the purpose of levy of duty of customs cannot be separated from the invoice price of the goods imported. That would amount to construing the one transaction of importing yarn into two transactions of import of two articles, instead of one yarn permitted to be imported. ( 5 ) ). We have carefully considered the contentions raised before us and are of the opinion that the petitions have no merits. Section 14 of the Customs Act provides for valuation of goods for the purpose of assessment of duties leviable under the Act. Relevant part of Sec. 14 reads as under :"14. Valuation of goods for purposes of assessment:- (1) For the purposes of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 (51 of 1975), or any other law for the time being in force whereunder a duty of customs is chargeable on any goods by reference to their value, the value of such goods shall be deemed to be the price at which such or like goods are ordinarily sold, or offered for sale, for delivery at the time and place of importation or exportation, as the case may be, in the course of international trade, where the seller and the buyer have no interest in the business of each other and the price is the sole consideration for the sale or offer the sale. . . . . "according to the said provision, for the purpose of the Act, where duty of cutoms is chargeable ad valorem on any import, the value of such imported goods shall be deemed to be the price at which such or like goods are ordinarily sold or offered for sale, for delivery at the time and place of importation or exportation as the case may be in the course of international trade. This necessarily means that price is to be taken of the goods in the condition as are or dinarily sold or delivered at the place of importation. This necessarily means that price is to be taken of the goods in the condition as are or dinarily sold or delivered at the place of importation. If the goods cannot be sold except in packages then value of goods at the place of importation will be ordinarily that which is price of goods in packages. The value of the goods in packed form has to be taken into consideration for assessing the value of goods so imported for the purpose of levying duty. ( 6 ) ). These is no dispute between the parties that the transaction of yarn cannot be carried in an unwounded state. It is in the ordinary course of business that the yarn is transacted only as wound on bobbins or caps. In fact, it cannot be transacted separately. The yarn is imported in the shape and form as wounded on bobbins and not free of bobbins. The position of bobbins is not different from that of package. The invoice value of the goods imported also is one whole price for the yarn wound on bobbins and not separate sale of yarn and package as two different transactions. It may be noticed that the invoices the petitioners have produced alongwith the petitions invariably show one price of the entire consignment, though in some of the cases, after showing one common rate for the entire consignment, note has been appended dividing the invoices price relatable to yarn and bobbins separately but without disclosing the rates of yarn or bobbins. To illustrate Annexure C1, in Special civil Application No. 1731 of 1983, invoice dated February 18, 1982 discloses that it is for 92 cartons of yarn weighing 2484 kgs. at the rate of 990 yen per kg, totalling 24,49,168 yens, after invoicing the entire consignment in this manner, it has further shown value of yarn and bobbins separately without assigning separate rates for yarn and bobbins. In some cases, even these particulars have not been shown. The fact remains that the entire consignment has been invoiced at one rate per kg. without any separate valuation of the bobbins and yarn. This is only for the purpose of illustrating that there is only one price shown in the invoice for the whole consignment of yarn on bobbins with reference to the rate of yarn and invoice is not for yarn and bobbins separately. ( 7 ) ). without any separate valuation of the bobbins and yarn. This is only for the purpose of illustrating that there is only one price shown in the invoice for the whole consignment of yarn on bobbins with reference to the rate of yarn and invoice is not for yarn and bobbins separately. ( 7 ) ). Keeping in view the provisions of Sec. 14 of the Customs Act for valuing the goods imported, which provides for valuing the goods at a price at which goods are already sold or offered for sale, at the palce of importation, the price of whole consignment as one, has to be taken into account as is obtaining at the time of importation and at the palce of importation and for the purpose of leying of duty of customs, the cost attributable to packing material cannot be separated for the purpose of valuing the commodity, which has been imported. ( 8 ) ). We are fortified in our aforesaid conclusion of the Supreme Court in Hind plastic Anr. v. The Collector of Customs, Bombay, reported in JT 1994 (3) SC 258. It was a case where P. V. C. was imported in packages. The question raised in that case was whether the petitioners are entitled to exemption from paying customs duty on the value of package in terms of notification No. 184 dated 2-8-1976 issued by the Central Government under Sec. 25 of the Customs Act. The notification granted exemption from payment of excise duty on packing material on certain conditions, one of which was that invoice must show separately the value of packing material of imported goods separately. The invoice did not show such separate value. Customs duty on import of P. V. C. was levied on full invoice. Thereafter, assessees claim for exemption from customs duty on import of packing material was rejected on that ground. Assessee had contended that the import otherwise fulfilled all conditions and that invoice value includes the cost of packing material, therefore, he is entitled to exemption. It was also contended that otherwise it will result in double taxation of packing material, once as part of cost included in the invoice price of P. V. C. and then as packing material separately. The revenue defended its stand on the anvil of Sec. 14 providing principles for valuing the imported goods for the purpose of levy of duty. It was also contended that otherwise it will result in double taxation of packing material, once as part of cost included in the invoice price of P. V. C. and then as packing material separately. The revenue defended its stand on the anvil of Sec. 14 providing principles for valuing the imported goods for the purpose of levy of duty. While a learned single Judge of Bombay High Court has accepted the contention of assessee, a Division Bench reversed the judgment. On appeal, Their lordships agreeing with Division Bench observed that :-"15. After giving anxious consideration to the rival points of view, we are inclined to agree with the view taken by the Division Bench of the Bombay High Court. It may, however, be that taxing of packing material twice, once at the rate applicable to the contents and then at the rate applicable to container, which would be the result if levy of duty on packing material were not to be exempted, may appear harsh, but it cannot be said to be illegal. What should be taxed is a matter not be decided by the Courts, but by appropriate instrumentalities or functionaries. The opposite viewpoint adopted by Pendse, J, (in his orders aforementioned) has the effect of deducting the value of packages from the value of the imported goods, i. e. , P. V. C. in this case, which is not provided either by the Act or by the Notification. Such an approach presupposes that while levying duty, proper officer will separate the values of the contents and the packages and levy the duty separately at the rates applicable thereto. The Act, however, does not contemplate such course and that does not also appear to be the practice. There appears another difficulty in the way of accepting the assessees contention as stated above, duty/additional duty is charged on the entire invoice value of P. V. C. (imported goods) at the rate applicable to P. V. C. ; now if the assessees contention is accepted, it means that the proper officer should separate the value of packages, calculate the duty/additional duty leviable thereon at the rate applicable to packages separately and give deduction (exemption) of such amount from the total amount; this "two-rates" theory is inconsistent with the rule of value in Sec. 14 (1 ). "the principle is fully applicable to the petitions before us. ( 9 ) ). "the principle is fully applicable to the petitions before us. ( 9 ) ). In view of the aforesaid clear pronouncement of their Lordships of the supreme Court, we are of the opinion that the goods imported, namely, Polyester filament Yarn has to be assessed at the rate applicable to yarn at the entire invoice price and the petitioners are not entitled to set off the value of the packages from the invoice price of yarn for the purpose of levy of customs duty. We may make it clear that we are not expressing any opinion on the question whether customs duty is payable on value of bobbins also and if so, whether petitioners are entitled to any benefit of exemption as a result of levy of customs duty on yarn at full invoice price, as the same are not subject-matter of these petitions. Accordingly, these petitions are dismissed with no order as to costs. Rule discharged. ( 10 ) ). Interim relief granted earlier in each petition stands vacated. .