TaxTMI Login
AI OCR ✕Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →Just a moment...
AI OCR ✕Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →
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
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: (i) whether advertising and promotion expenditure incurred by the importer under the distribution agreement was includible in the assessable value of the imported goods under the Customs Valuation Rules, 2007; (ii) whether the demand was barred by limitation on the ground that the facts were disclosed to the Special Valuation Branch.
Issue (i): whether advertising and promotion expenditure incurred by the importer under the distribution agreement was includible in the assessable value of the imported goods under the Customs Valuation Rules, 2007.
Analysis: The importer and the foreign supplier were related parties, and the agreement required the importer to spend not less than 6% of net invoiced sales on advertising and promotions, together with reporting and verification obligations. The additional contractual controls showed that the promotion activity was undertaken as part of the seller's brand strategy and not merely on the importer's own account. On these facts, the expenditure was treated as a condition of sale and as an amount incurred to satisfy the seller's obligation, thereby attracting inclusion in the transaction value. The interpretative note to Rule 3(2)(b) did not assist the importer because the expenditure was not held to be a buyer's independent marketing cost.
Conclusion: The advertising and promotion expenditure was rightly added to the assessable value, and the valuation demand was upheld.
Issue (ii): whether the demand was barred by limitation on the ground that the facts were disclosed to the Special Valuation Branch.
Analysis: The agreement containing the advertising expenditure clause was not produced before the Special Valuation Branch in the declaration, and this omission was treated as suppression of material facts. In that situation, the extended limitation period was held to be invocable, and the challenge based on time bar failed.
Conclusion: The demand was not barred by limitation.
Final Conclusion: The order confirming differential duty, interest, and penalty was sustained, and the appeal failed in entirety.
Ratio Decidendi: Where a related-party import agreement obliges the buyer to incur advertising and promotion expenditure as part of the sale arrangement and for the seller's brand promotion, such expenditure forms part of the assessable value under the Customs Valuation Rules; non-disclosure of the agreement to the valuation authorities constitutes suppression justifying extended limitation.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
