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 royalty and technical know-how fee paid to a foreign collaborator were includible in the assessable value of the imported goods. (ii) Whether the Department's appeal could be sustained in view of the earlier accepted valuation order.
Issue (i): Whether royalty and technical know-how fee paid to a foreign collaborator were includible in the assessable value of the imported goods.
Analysis: The agreement showed that the royalty was linked to net sales of the licensed articles and that the technical know-how payment related to post-import manufacturing activity. The importer was free to source components from other suppliers and there was no restriction that purchases had to be made only from the foreign collaborator. On those facts, the payment was not a condition of sale of the imported goods, and the cited valuation rules governing addition of such payments were not attracted.
Conclusion: The royalty and technical know-how fee were not includible in the assessable value, and this issue was decided in favour of the assessee.
Issue (ii): Whether the Department's appeal could be sustained in view of the earlier accepted valuation order.
Analysis: The earlier valuation order had been accepted by the Department, and no appeal had been pursued against the prior appellate order. The impugned order merely followed the earlier accepted valuation position, which furnished an additional reason against interference.
Conclusion: The Department's appeal was not sustainable on this ground as well, and this issue was decided against the Revenue.
Final Conclusion: The valuation adopted by the lower authorities was upheld, and the Department's challenge to inclusion of royalty and technical know-how charges failed.
Ratio Decidendi: Payments towards royalty or technical know-how are not includible in the assessable value of imported goods unless they are payable as a condition of sale of those goods.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
