Sponsored
    Follow Us:

Case Law Details

Case Name : Chem Rend Chemicals Co. Pvt. Ltd. Vs Commissioner of Customs (CESTAT Bangalore)
Appeal Number : Customs Appeal No 21708 of 2016
Date of Judgement/Order : 16/02/2024
Related Assessment Year :
Become a Premium member to Download. If you are already a Premium member, Login here to access.
Sponsored

Chem Rend Chemicals Co. Pvt. Ltd. Vs Commissioner of Customs (CESTAT Bangalore)

Introduction: In a significant ruling, the Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) Bangalore addressed the intricate issue of valuation under the GST regime, particularly focusing on the inclusion of royalty payments. The case of Chem Rend Chemicals Co. Pvt. Ltd. Vs Commissioner of Customs has set a precedent, clarifying the circumstances under which royalty is considered in the valuation of imported goods under the Customs Valuation Rules, 2007.

Detailed Analysis: The appellant, Chem Rend Chemicals Co. Pvt. Ltd., engaged in trading various industrial products, faced a valuation dispute under Rules 9 and 10(1)(c) of the Customs Valuation Rules, 2007. The contention revolved around the addition of royalty payments to the value of imported goods. The appellant had an agreement with Chem Trend, USA, involving the payment of royalty for the use of trade secrets and Intellectual Property Rights related to manufacturing and selling specified products in India.

The crux of the dispute was whether the royalty paid for intellectual property rights should be added to the assessable value of imported goods used for trading and repacking in India. The Customs authorities initially ordered a 100% loading on the declared invoice price and included the royalty payments in the assessable value, which was challenged by the appellant.

The Tribunal meticulously examined the Customs Valuation Rules, 2007, and relevant legal precedents. It emphasized that royalty payments are pertinent to the valuation only when they relate directly to the imported goods and are a condition of their sale. The Tribunal observed that in the appellant’s case, the royalty was paid for manufacturing technology used exclusively for products made in India, not for the traded or repacked imported goods.

Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.

Sponsored

Join Taxguru’s Network for Latest updates on Income Tax, GST, Company Law, Corporate Laws and other related subjects.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Sponsored
Sponsored
Search Post by Date
July 2024
M T W T F S S
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
293031