9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (1) TMI 451X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of communication, networking, instrumentation needed for medical and defence along with the requirement of consumer sector. For the manufactured products in relation to consumer sector, one of their customers is Philips Electronics India Ltd. (Philips). Appellants manufacture various types of ballasts as per Philips technical specifications and drawings and affix their brand name. It is the claim of the appellant that the transaction is on principal to principal basis. After taking up investigation, verification of documents and completion of proceedings, as a result of two show-cause notices issued to the appellants, impugned order has been passed. In the impugned order, differential duty of Rs. 11,31,07,522/- has been demanded in respe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... i) The finished goods manufactured by QSP will be purchased by Philips on principal to principal basis at mutually agreed prices. (iii) Philips will be responsible for rendering after sales services. (iv) Philips or its authorized representatives can undertake control and supervision of the manufacture so that the goods manufactured conform to the design, specifications and quality standards specified by Philips. Process rejections will be deemed rejection on account of QSP and when such rejection / return of the goods is made, QSP has to either replace or rectify the goods free of cost. Intellectual Property Rights relating to the goods shall remain property of Philips and QSP will maintain confidentiality. Know-how, trademarks and techn ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... charges have actually been paid by them. It is their submission that there is no cash payment since the amounts to be paid towards hire charges have been deducted in the amount payable by Philips. The Commissioner has reached the conclusion that there is mutuality of interest of business between the appellants on this ground in paragraph 23.5 and we find these observations to be not based on facts, we find that appellants has made a prima facie case about relationship and mutuality of interest between the two to determine the value taking a view that both are related parties. 4.1 The second conclusion based on the observation in paragraph 23.6 of the impugned order shows that Commissioner has come to the conclusion that Philips exercises ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
