2002 (12) TMI 435

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... tion, U.S.A., (Supplier) are related as per Rule 2(2)(v) of Customs Valuation Rules, 1988; that the transaction value declared in the import invoice may be accepted under Rule 4 of the Customs Valuation Rules, 1988 after usual procedure and verification; that this order does not take into account any suppression or mis-declaration affecting invoice value, which shall be dealt with appropriately under the law and procedure as and when noticed. 3. In the grounds of appeal, the Dy. Commissioner has stated that this appeal has been filed as per the directions of the Commissioner of Customs vide his Order No. 19/2002, dated 26-2-2002 as per the provisions under Section 129D(2) and 129D(4) of the Customs Act, 1962; that the importer entered int .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... tedly relatable to the imported goods and hence loadable under Rule 9(1)(c) of CVR 88 to the assessable value. 4. Hence, it is prayed that under the provisions of Section 129D(2) and 129D(4) of the Customs Act, 1962, the Hon ble Commissioner of Customs (Appeals) to determine the propriety of the Order-in-Original and pass an order as it may deem fit. 5. During personal hearing held on 23-12-2002 Shri R. Muralidharan, Cost Accountant and N. Ramachandran, Officer-Excise, represented the respondent and submitted that the written submissions given during the personal hearing on 19-9-2002 may be taken on record. Reiterated that royalty should not be added because they are not related to the products imported. Royalty is basically about manu .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... n supplier. The addition is sought to be made under Rule 9(1)(c) which envisages the addition of royalty and the licence fee be related to imported goods that the buyer is required to pay directly or indirectly as a condition of the sale of the goods being valued to the extent that such royalties and fees are not included in the actually paid or payable. So, the contention of the appellant that the royalty is added in the value of the imported goods cannot be considered as valid for the simple reason that the royalty payment is being made after excluding the price of the imported components that have gone into producing the licensed goods. In view of this and as per provisions of Rule 9(1)(c) stated above, the payment of royalty is to be re .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X