Customs valuation excludes royalty linked to local manufacture where no nexus with imported goods or sale condition is shown.

Royalty and licence fee under a technical assistance and trademark agreement were not includible in the customs assessable value of imported goods where the payments were referable to manufacture of licensed products in India, not to the imported components. Rule 9(1)(c) applies only when such payments relate to the imported goods and are payable as a condition of sale, with a demonstrable nexus to the import price. Rule 9(1)(e) could not operate as an independent fallback in the absence of a finding that the impugned payments were a different condition-linked consideration for the imports. The Tribunal's valuation was therefore upheld.

---

---

Issues: Whether royalty and licence fee payable under a technical assistance and trademark agreement were includible in the assessable value of imported goods under Rule 9(1)(c) of the Customs Valuation (Determination of Price of Imported Goods) Rules, 1988, or alternatively under Rule 9(1)(e), when the transaction value of the imported goods itself was accepted.

Analysis: Section 14 of the Customs Act, 1962 read with the 1988 Valuation Rules requires valuation on an arm's length basis, with additions permitted only where the specified statutory conditions are met. Rule 9(1)(c) applies only when royalty or licence fee is related to the imported goods and is payable as a condition of sale. The agreement in question showed that the royalty and licence fee were referable to the manufacture of the finished licensed products in India and not to the imported components. The Department examined only the technical agreement and did not establish any pricing adjustment or nexus showing that the price of the imported goods had been depressed to accommodate royalty. Rule 9(1)(e) could not be used as an independent fallback, since the case was fundamentally one of alleged royalty loading and there was no finding that the impugned payments were some other condition-linked consideration for the imported goods.

Conclusion: The royalty and licence fee were not includible in the assessable value of the imported goods under Rule 9(1)(c) or Rule 9(1)(e), and the Department's appeal failed.

Final Conclusion: The valuation adopted by the Tribunal was upheld, and the customs demands based on loading the import price with royalty and know-how charges did not survive.

Ratio Decidendi: Royalty or licence fee is includible in the customs assessable value only when it is shown to be related to the imported goods and payable as a condition of sale, with a demonstrable nexus to the import price.

---