TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Join Channel
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: (i) whether the declared import value could be rejected and enhanced on the ground that the importer and foreign supplier were related and the relationship had influenced the price; (ii) whether technical know-how fee or royalty was includible in the assessable value under the Customs Valuation Rules, 1988.
Issue (i): whether the declared import value could be rejected and enhanced on the ground that the importer and foreign supplier were related and the relationship had influenced the price.
Analysis: The comparable import data and the procurement invoices showed that the goods were procured by the foreign collaborator from third parties at prices roughly matching the prices charged to the importer, with only minor variation in some instances. The goods imported were found to be in the nature of plastic granules and stamping foil, which were not shown to be covered by the technology transfer agreement in a manner suggesting price influence. On the material placed, the relationship between the parties was not established as having distorted the declared value, and the enhancement under Rule 8 lacked a sustainable basis.
Conclusion: The declared transaction value was accepted and the addition of 20% on the ground of relationship was not justified.
Issue (ii): whether technical know-how fee or royalty was includible in the assessable value under the Customs Valuation Rules, 1988.
Analysis: For inclusion under Rule 9(1)(c), there had to be material showing that payment of the royalty or technical know-how fee was a condition of sale of the imported goods. No such condition or supporting evidence was shown. In the absence of such nexus between the payment and the import of goods, the proposed addition could not be sustained.
Conclusion: The technical know-how fee or royalty was not includible in the assessable value.
Final Conclusion: The valuation enhancement was set aside, and the Revenue's challenge failed while the connected cross-objection stood disposed of.
Ratio Decidendi: Related-party imports cannot be rejected on valuation unless the revenue establishes that the relationship influenced the price, and royalty or technical know-how payments are includible only where they are shown to be a condition of sale of the imported goods.
TaxTMI 
