Alternative statutory remedy and unexplained delay barred writ review of customs confiscation adjudication, leaving merits for appellate consideration...
Authorised courier due diligence protects against penalties where declared exports conceal prohibited goods despite proper documentation and customs p...
Customs-controlled container movement now extends to DP World facilities, subject to segregation, inspections, reconciliation, and EXIM cargo priority...
CESTAT ruled that royalty and technical fees paid by appellant to foreign supplier were not includible in transaction value of imported goods under Rule 10(1)(c) of CVR 2007. While analyzing the technical assistance agreement, tribunal found only 9% of final product value came from imports. The agreement primarily covered technical personnel deployment for obtaining product approvals from Company H, with no direct connection to imported raw materials. Following precedents in Company B and Company BB cases, CESTAT held that absent clear nexus between royalty payments and imported goods as condition of sale, such payments cannot be added to transaction value. Differential customs duty demand set aside and appeal allowed.
CESTAT ruled that royalty and technical fees paid by appellant to foreign supplier were not includible in transaction value of imported goods under Rule 10(1)(c) of CVR 2007. While analyzing the technical assistance agreement, tribunal found only 9% of final product value came from imports. The agreement primarily covered technical personnel deployment for obtaining product approvals from Company H, with no direct connection to imported raw materials. Following precedents in Company B and Company BB cases, CESTAT held that absent clear nexus between royalty payments and imported goods as condition of sale, such payments cannot be added to transaction value. Differential customs duty demand set aside and appeal allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4827 
Join Channel 
