<?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 (2) TMI 147 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=4631</link>
    <description>Engineering and know-how fees paid under a technical collaboration agreement were held includible in the assessable value of imported plant and machinery under Rule 9(1)(b)(iv) of the Customs Valuation Rules. The agreement was treated as a composite arrangement for supply of equipment together with technical data, drawings and know-how necessary to establish and operate the plant, and the imported machinery could not function without that technical assistance. On that basis, the know-how fee was found to be intrinsically connected with the imported goods and to constitute a condition of sale, even though it was not expressly stated in the contract. The lower authority&#039;s exclusion was set aside.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 27 Feb 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 18 Jul 2008 00:00:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=43972" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2008 (2) TMI 147 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=4631</link>
      <description>Engineering and know-how fees paid under a technical collaboration agreement were held includible in the assessable value of imported plant and machinery under Rule 9(1)(b)(iv) of the Customs Valuation Rules. The agreement was treated as a composite arrangement for supply of equipment together with technical data, drawings and know-how necessary to establish and operate the plant, and the imported machinery could not function without that technical assistance. On that basis, the know-how fee was found to be intrinsically connected with the imported goods and to constitute a condition of sale, even though it was not expressly stated in the contract. The lower authority&#039;s exclusion was set aside.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 27 Feb 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=4631</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>