<?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>2001 (9) TMI 179 - CEGAT, CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=50837</link>
    <description>Royalty and licence fees paid for imported film prints and trailers were treated as includible in customs assessable value because the goods could not be used without the accompanying reproduction and distribution rights, and the invoice-linked payment formed part of the import transaction. The exclusion for payments relating to reproduction or distribution rights applied only where such amounts were not a condition of sale for export to the country of importation. As the claimed split between royalty and distribution charges was not proved by reliable evidence, and the burden of showing exclusion was on the importer, the full invoiced amount was taken into account under Rule 9(1)(c) of the Customs Valuation Rules, 1988.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 03 Sep 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 17 Sep 2010 16:12:25 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=89316" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2001 (9) TMI 179 - CEGAT, CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=50837</link>
      <description>Royalty and licence fees paid for imported film prints and trailers were treated as includible in customs assessable value because the goods could not be used without the accompanying reproduction and distribution rights, and the invoice-linked payment formed part of the import transaction. The exclusion for payments relating to reproduction or distribution rights applied only where such amounts were not a condition of sale for export to the country of importation. As the claimed split between royalty and distribution charges was not proved by reliable evidence, and the burden of showing exclusion was on the importer, the full invoiced amount was taken into account under Rule 9(1)(c) of the Customs Valuation Rules, 1988.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 03 Sep 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=50837</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>