2015 (5) TMI 696

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Rachit Jain, Adv. Ms Hemant Bajaj, Adv. Mr Aman D, Adv. Mrs Disha Jain, Adv. Mr R Ramachandran, Adv. Mr Aditya Bhattacharya, Adv. Mr Ambarish Pandey, Adv. ORDER Civil Appeal No. 2420 of 2005 The respondent - assessee is engaged in the manufacture of copper and copper products in their smelter plant. For setting up of the said smelter plant, it had imported certain capital goods from a few foreign suppliers, which included M/s. Outokumpu Engineering Contractors, Finland (for short "OEC"). Three agreements of dated 12th November, 1994 were entered into between the respondent and the OEC. These are known as Licence Agreement, Delivery of Proprietary Equipments Agreement and Basic Engineering, Training and Technical Services Agreement....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....gh the order of the CESTAT, it becomes clear that the CESTAT has gone into the various provisions of the three agreements and has come to the conclusion that neither the fees paid under the Licence Agreement nor under the Basic Engineering, Training and Technical Services Agreement related to the import of the capital goods nor was it a condition of sale and on that basis it has recorded the finding that the provisions of Rule 9(1)(b)(iv) or Rule 9(1)(c) or Rule 9(1)(e) of the aforesaid Rules would apply to the facts of the case. That apart, it further finds that both the Agreements, viz., Licence Agreement as well as Basic Engineering, Training and Technical Services Agreement, pertained to the services that were to be provided post import....