9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
Whether the amount paid for technical know-how is includible in the assessable value of imported goods under Rule 9(1)(c) of the Customs Valuation Rules, 1988. Analysis: The appellants imported raw materials for catalyst manufacture from a foreign supplier under a joint venture agreement. The issue revolved around the inclusion of technical know-how fees in the assessable value of imported goods. The original authority and the Commissioner (Appeals) held the amounts to be includible. The appellant argued that technical know-how fees were not relatable to the imported goods, citing precedents like Ferodo India (Pvt.) Ltd. v. CC. The appellant emphasized that the technical fee was only for the final product's manufacture and not a condition for importing the goods. The Tribunal noted that the technical fee was not linked to the imported goods and that there was no obligation to import solely from the foreign supplier. The agreement's Appendix A, mentioning precious metal solutions, did not imply a condition for paying technical know-how fees. The Tribunal agreed with the appellant's contentions, stating that the technical fee for catalyst manufacture should not be added to the imported goods' value. The Tribunal allowed the appeal, granting consequential relief to the appellants. This judgment highlights the importance of distinguishing between technical know-how fees related to the final product's manufacture and those linked to imported goods. The Tribunal emphasized that technical fees must directly impact the imported goods' value to be includible, rejecting the Revenue's argument based on the agreement's Appendix A. The decision underscores the need for a clear nexus between technical fees and imported goods to determine their assessable value accurately. The reliance on relevant case law and the consideration of pricing methods further strengthened the Tribunal's decision in favor of the appellants.
|
