Just a moment...
Generate professional replies to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter.
Step 1 – Issue Identification & Review
The AI analyses your query, notice, order, or uploaded documents and identifies the key issues involved.
• Review the issues identified by the AI
• Add, edit, remove, or refine issues as required
Step 2 – Draft Generation
Once you approve the issues, the AI performs issue-wise legal research and prepares a structured draft response.
• Relevant statutory provisions
• Judicial precedents and Supreme Court, High Court and other citations
• Issue-wise legal analysis
• Practical arguments and supporting content
• Professionally structured draft ready for further review. 
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the licence fee and basic engineering fee paid under the agreements with the foreign collaborator were includible in the assessable value of the imported capital goods for the sulphuric acid plant under Rule 9 of the Customs Valuation Rules, 1988.
Analysis: The value-loading could not be sustained because the payments under the licence and basic engineering arrangements were found to relate to the overall sulphuric acid plant and the technology for its operation, which comprised both imported and indigenous equipment, rather than to the imported capital goods alone. Rule 9(1)(b)(iv) was inapplicable because no engineering, development, artwork, design work or plans were supplied by the buyer free of charge to the seller. Rule 9(1)(c) was also inapplicable because the licence fee was for the right to use the technology and was not shown to be a condition of sale of the imported goods or related to those goods. Rule 9(1)(e) could not be invoked because payments unconnected with the imported goods do not form part of customs value merely because they arise under linked agreements.
Conclusion: The licence fee and basic engineering fee were not includible in the assessable value of the imported capital goods, and the loading of 2.03% was unsustainable.