<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2008 (4) TMI 624 - CESTAT, CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=123918</link>
    <description>Royalty paid under a technology transfer agreement on post-import sales of licensed products was held not includible in the assessable value of imported goods under Rule 9(1)(c) of the Customs Valuation Rules, 1988. The royalty was calculated as a percentage of net sales in India and exports, while the agreement specifically excluded landed cost, freight, insurance and customs duties from that computation. Because the royalty had no direct relation to the imported goods and was not a condition of import, it fell outside Rule 9(1)(c). The exclusion of royalty from assessable value was therefore sustained and the Revenue&#039;s challenge failed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 25 Apr 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 22 Sep 2012 10:17:37 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=160878" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2008 (4) TMI 624 - CESTAT, CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=123918</link>
      <description>Royalty paid under a technology transfer agreement on post-import sales of licensed products was held not includible in the assessable value of imported goods under Rule 9(1)(c) of the Customs Valuation Rules, 1988. The royalty was calculated as a percentage of net sales in India and exports, while the agreement specifically excluded landed cost, freight, insurance and customs duties from that computation. Because the royalty had no direct relation to the imported goods and was not a condition of import, it fell outside Rule 9(1)(c). The exclusion of royalty from assessable value was therefore sustained and the Revenue&#039;s challenge failed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 25 Apr 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=123918</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>