Transaction value rejection requires reliable corroboration; refundable VAT is excluded and temporary registration does not defeat new-vehicle exempti...
Appellate jurisdiction remains available where a wrist-worn gold ornament cannot conclusively be characterised as imported baggage at the preliminary ...
Written complaint requirement bars cognizance on police reports for securities offences, while unsupported breach of trust and cheating allegations fa...
Risk-based postal import clearance standardises electronic assessment, document requests, duty realisation and delivery controls at Foreign Post Offic...
Customs Cargo Service Provider appointment extends custodianship to additional terminal land, subject to cargo-control, security and licence condition...
Page of 4786
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
61 to 80 of 95714 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
CESTAT Chennai addressed the issue of including royalty payments in the transaction value of imported raw materials for customs duty calculation. The tribunal found that the royalty payment to Valeo, France was not directly linked to the import of raw materials but rather tied to various services and rights provided under the Technology Licence Agreement. The tribunal held that the Department's attempt to invoke the extended period for duty demand was not legally sustainable as the issue was known to the Department for years without action. The tribunal set aside the differential duty demand for 13 years, emphasizing that royalty should not be included in the transaction value of imported raw materials. The appeal was allowed, granting consequential benefits as per the law.
CESTAT Chennai addressed the issue of including royalty payments in the transaction value of imported raw materials for customs duty calculation. The tribunal found that the royalty payment to Valeo, France was not directly linked to the import of raw materials but rather tied to various services and rights provided under the Technology Licence Agreement. The tribunal held that the Department's attempt to invoke the extended period for duty demand was not legally sustainable as the issue was known to the Department for years without action. The tribunal set aside the differential duty demand for 13 years, emphasizing that royalty should not be included in the transaction value of imported raw materials. The appeal was allowed, granting consequential benefits as per the law.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4786
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
