9911796707
TMI Blog2004 (3) TMI 672X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n the name and style of Fiat India Automobiles Pvt. Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as the FIAPL ) with the equity participation/share capital as follows : 2. M/s. FIAPL will control 51% shares and the Doshi family up to 49% of the shares carrying on the business of manufacturing, selling, importing and exporting fiat motor cars and light commercial vehicles as well as components and spare parts thereof. 3. M/s. FIAPL vide their letter dated 21-11-2000, have submitted the following documents : 1. Foreign Collaboration Agreement dated 23-12-1996. 2. Supplementary Collaboration Agreement dated 15-04-1997. 3. Supplementary Collaboration Agreement dated 21-05-1997. 4. Supplementary Collaboration Agreement date ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . FIAPL will pay to Fiat Auto a lump sum of US $ 92,00,000/- subject to taxes in consideration for : (a) the technology of the Fiat 178 Models including the specific engineering to adopt the products for the Indian Market: (b) the technological project for the manufacturing operations of the New Plant. 3. Payment for design/drawings : US $ 10,00,000/- subject to taxes. 6. Supplementary Agreement made on 20-01-1998, wherein Doshi family not being in a position to subscribe and pay for 26% of the proposed paid up capital of Rs. 910/- crores, further application was made to the Government for increase of foreign equity participation from 74% to 100% in the proposed equity capital of Rs. 910/- crores in M/s. FIAPL approv ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sed by him in the said order. 9. Accordingly, the Dy. Commissioner of Customs, GATT Valuation Cell, New Custom House, Mumbai (hereinafter referred to as the appellant ) filed the appeal for the correct determination of the following points arising out of the said order: (a) whether after taking into consideration the facts and reasons stated above, the order of Dy. Commissioner of Customs is legal and proper. (b) Whether by an order passed under Section 128A(3) of the Customs Act, 1962 the Commissioner (Appeals) should set aside the order of Dy. Commissioner of Customs and remand the case back to the lower authority for de novo consideration and passing a speaking order after applying his mind to all relevant aspect of the ca ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the condition mentioned in SIA approval letter dated 1st September, 1997, hence it would not be addable to the declared value in terms of Rule 9(1)(c) of the Customs Valuation Rules, 1988. This view has been upheld in terms of the following judgments - 1. CC (Import), Mumbai v. M/s. Balsara Extrusions Pvt. Ltd. as reported in 2004 (163) E.L.T. 187 (T) = 2004 (60) RLT 809 (CESTAT - Mum.) 2. M/s. New Reshma Dyg. Ltd. v. CCE, Mumbai as reported in 2004 (60) RLT 813 (CESTAT - Mum.) 13. M/s. FIAPL got licence for manufacturing of various types of licenced products. The goods supplied by M/s. Fiat Auto are bought out and manufactured items. These items were supplied by Fiat Auto to M/s. FIAPL by adding mark up profit. The pr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
