Just a moment...

Report
FeedbackReport
Bars
Logo TaxTMI
>
×

By creating an account you can:

Feedback/Report an Error
Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / RSS

2014 (5) TMI 944

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....tated facts of the case are that the appellant is related with the supplier viz. M/s. Renault s.a.s France in terms of Rule 2(2) of the Customs Valuation Rules, 2007 (herein referred to CVR). Accordingly, the case for valuation was registered with SVB, NCH, Mumbai for investigation. The appellant vide their letter dated 2-8-2006 furnished detailed answers to the questionnaire giving details of their agreement to the lower adjudicating authority. The adjudicating authority after examining of Technology License Agreement, Technical Assistance Engineering and Training Services Agreement came to the conclusion that the declared invoice value for the goods imported by the appellant from their supplier M/s. Renault s.a.s. France, associated of th....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....the appellant is that the agreement is fixed to eight installments of 18,75,000 each and that there was no co-relation between the fees and import of parts and components. 5. The learned A.R. reiterated the findings of the Commissioner (Appeals). 6. We have carefully considered the submissions and perused the records. Admittedly the department sought to load the assessable value under Rule 10(1)(c) of CVR. Rule 10(1)(c) of CVR reads as under :- Royalties and licence fees related to the imported goods that the buyer is required to pay, directly or indirectly, as a condition of the sale of the goods being valued, to the extent that such royalties and fees are not included in the price actually paid or payable; 6.1 We find t....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ng of the vehicle. It appears that the Respondent's contention that the royalty is payable on the production of 1,40,000/- licensed vehicle and the same has not been paid so far as they have manufactured 46,000 vehicles has been accepted by the adjudicating authority. The above contention does not appear to be correct in view of the fact as soon as the vehicle is manufactured and sold the royalty becomes due and payable and thereafter includible. Thus, the Revenue's contention that the Explanation to Rule 10(1) of the Customs Valuation Rules, 2007 clearly states that where the royalty, licence fee or any payment for the process whether patented or otherwise includible referred in clause 10(1)(c)(e) such charges shall be added to the price a....