9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
Interpretation of Rule 9(1)(c) of the Customs Valuation Rules, 1988 regarding inclusion of technical documents fees in the transaction value of imported goods. Analysis: The case involved a Joint Venture (JV) company established for manufacturing steering columns and steering joint assemblies for automobiles under Licence and Technical Assistance Agreements with foreign collaborators. The dispute arose when the Dy. Commissioner held that the technical documents fees payable by the company to the foreign collaborators should be added to the transaction value of imported goods under Rule 9(1)(c). The first appellate authority upheld this decision, leading to the appeal against the Commissioner (Appeals) order. The appellants argued that the technical documents fees were not related to the imported goods and were not a condition of sale. They highlighted the reduction in imports over the years while the payments to collaborators remained constant. Relying on Tribunal's decisions, they contended that the fee should not be included in the assessable value under Rule 9(1)(c). The Department, however, supported the Commissioner's findings. Upon examining the Licence and Technical Assistance Agreements, the Tribunal found a clear nexus between the technical documents fees and the licensed products. The agreements defined "Know-how" as essential information for manufacturing the products. Provisions for technical assistance and training further established this connection. The lower authority attempted to link the fee to imported components but failed to show a direct correlation. Referring to Rule 9(1)(c), the Tribunal determined that the technical know-how fee was not related to the imported components and was not a condition of sale. Citing precedents like S.D. Technical Service and Panalfa Dongwon India Ltd., where similar fees were not included in the assessable value, the Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellants. The fee was deemed unrelated to the imported goods, and the provisional assessments were directed to be finalized accordingly. In conclusion, the Tribunal set aside the impugned order, allowing the appeal and dismissing the stay application. The decision was pronounced on 10-3-2005, emphasizing the exclusion of the technical documents fees from the assessable value of imported components.
|
