9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
1. Whether the lump sum payment made towards technical documentation and drawings under an agreement should be added to the transaction value for customs valuation. Analysis: The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT CHENNAI, comprising Ms. Jyoti Balasundaram and Dr. Chittaranjan Satapathy, JJ., deliberated on the issue of adding a lump sum payment of USD 2,25,000 towards technical documentation and drawings to the transaction value for customs valuation. The lower appellate authority had accepted the Revenue's contention that the payment should be added under Rule 9(1)(c) of the Customs Valuation Rules to the price under Rule 4 as transaction value. However, the Tribunal carefully examined the Joint Venture Agreement and Technology License Agreement. They specifically analyzed clauses 1.4, 1.5, and 1.7 of the Technology License Agreement to determine the nature of the payment and its relation to the imported goods. The Tribunal noted that the technical know-how fee payable in relation to the imported goods becomes addable under Rule 9(1)(c). Upon a detailed review of the agreements and relevant clauses, the Tribunal concluded that the payment made by the assessees was not in relation to the imported goods but rather in relation to the final products to be manufactured in India. The Tribunal highlighted that the payment towards technical documentation and drawings was not required to be added to the price for customs valuation. The Tribunal emphasized that the Revenue failed to establish any clause in the agreements indicating that the payment was specifically related to the imported goods. Consequently, the Tribunal accepted the assessees' contention, set aside the impugned order, and allowed the appeal in favor of the appellant. In the final order pronounced in open court, the Tribunal clarified its decision based on the lack of evidence linking the payment to the imported goods, ultimately leading to the reversal of the lower appellate authority's decision.
|
