Related-party customs valuation and royalty loading depend on statutory proof; declared value and assessable value were upheld on the available record.

In related-party customs sales, the declared transaction value may be accepted where there is no reliable material showing that the relationship influenced price; here, the record did not justify rejection of the declared value, so valuation had to proceed on that basis. Royalty or licence fee can be added to the assessable value of imported components only if the payment is linked to the imported goods in the manner required by the valuation rules, including where resale proceeds accrue to the seller; here, the royalty related to finished products and no qualifying accrual was shown, so no loading was permitted. The valuation order was set aside and assessment was directed on the declared value.

---

---

Issues: (i) whether, in a sale between related persons, the declared transaction value of the imported goods could be accepted when there was no material to show that the relationship influenced the price; (ii) whether royalty or licence fee paid on the finished goods could be added to the assessable value of the imported components under the Customs Valuation Rules.

Issue (i): whether, in a sale between related persons, the declared transaction value of the imported goods could be accepted when there was no material to show that the relationship influenced the price.

Analysis: The governing rule permits acceptance of transaction value in related-party sales only where the circumstances of sale indicate that the relationship did not influence the price. The importer had disclosed related-person status, but the record did not contain reliable material showing a proper examination of the circumstances of sale. Comparisons with sales to other related entities were not sufficient as test values for the statutory comparison mechanism. In the absence of convincing evidence from either side, the valuation adopted by way of declared value could not be rejected merely on conjecture, and the practical difficulty arising from the age of the dispute supported final settlement on the material available.

Conclusion: The declared value could not be displaced on the basis of the material before the authority, and the assessee succeeded on this issue.

Issue (ii): whether royalty or licence fee paid on the finished goods could be added to the assessable value of the imported components under the Customs Valuation Rules.

Analysis: Addition of royalty or licence fee is justified only where the payment is linked to the imported goods in the manner required by the valuation rules, including where part of the proceeds of subsequent resale accrues to the seller. On the facts found, the royalty and licence fee related to manufacture and sale of the finished products in India and abroad, and no part of the proceeds of the coffee cans using the imported parts was shown to have accrued to the foreign seller. The statutory conditions for loading the import value were therefore not satisfied.

Conclusion: The royalty or licence fee could not be added to the assessable value, and the assessee succeeded on this issue.

Final Conclusion: The impugned valuation order was set aside, and assessment was directed to proceed on the declared value, bringing the dispute to an end in favour of the importer.

---