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 held that royalty payments to a foreign entity for technology and trademark use should not be included in the assessable value of imported goods under Rule 10(1)(c). The tribunal found that the royalty was calculated based on CKD kit imports and was independent of the sale conditions. The First Appellate Authority's order was set aside due to lack of reasoned analysis, violating principles of natural justice. The royalty payment was deemed unrelated to the import transaction, thus not qualifying for inclusion in the dutiable value. Consequently, the appeal was allowed, rejecting the attempt to enhance the customs duty assessment.
CESTAT held that royalty payments to a foreign entity for technology and trademark use should not be included in the assessable value of imported goods under Rule 10(1)(c). The tribunal found that the royalty was calculated based on CKD kit imports and was independent of the sale conditions. The First Appellate Authority's order was set aside due to lack of reasoned analysis, violating principles of natural justice. The royalty payment was deemed unrelated to the import transaction, thus not qualifying for inclusion in the dutiable value. Consequently, the appeal was allowed, rejecting the attempt to enhance the customs duty assessment.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4827 
Join Channel 
