2016 (8) TMI 180

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Respondent Shri  R. Chandrasekhar, AC (AR) ORDER Appeal is against order dated 30.04.2004 passed by Commissioner of Customs (Appeals), Chennai.  Appellant entered into an agreement with M/s. Samlip Industrial Co. Ltd., Korea for manufacture of various licensed products in terms of agreement dated 06.05.1997.  They have imported mounting pipes and insulators which are used for....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....to be supplied to M/s. Hyundai India.  A technical-knowhow fees is not a condition for import of the impugned goods and there is no nexus in the import transaction with the manufacturing based on technical-knowhow.  He further submitted that despite the submission of all related documents, the original authority as well as appellate authority came to a summary conclusion without examinin....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....by the original authority from para 9 of his order.  The reasoning given is based on article 5.2 of the impugned agreement.  The said article deals with fee to be paid for technology in manufacture of licensed product.  The original authority concluded that the said article of agreement clearly shows the link between the imported items and the technical-knowhow fee.  We are not....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....d has been concluded as reason for rejecting the appeal. 6.  In the above circumstances, we are constrained to observe that the present impugned order cannot be sustained.  The matter has to go back to the original authority to examine the issue afresh regarding the applicability of the provisions of Rule 9 (1) (c) of the then Customs Valuation Rules, 1988 to the facts of the present ....