9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (4) TMI 44X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the manufacture of settop boxes, which are sold by the assessee to Thomson Holdings India Private Limited ('Thomson India' for short). Thomson India sold the settop boxes manufactured by the assessee to M/s.Tata Sky Limited, Mumbai, without subjecting the settop boxes to any further activity. Jabil Circuit Inc., USA is the parent company of the assessee. Thomson Hongkong Holdings Limited is the parent company of Thomson India. Pursuant to a Memorandum of Understanding dated 6th March 2006 entered into by and between the aforesaid two parent companies, the assessee was to manufacture and sell the settop boxes to Thomson India in accordance with the specifications and the requirements of Thomson India. 3. As per Section 4(1)(a) of the 1944 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rice charged by Thomson India to Tata Sky Limited (instead of the price charged by the assessee to Thomson India) in respect of the goods cleared during the period from 1st April 2007 to 23rd January 2008 should not be treated as the transaction value of the goods sold by the assessee to Thomson India under Rule 10A of the 2000 Rules and the duty be recovered accordingly. The assessee contested the showcause notice by filing a detailed reply. By an orderinoriginal dated 31st August 2009, the Adjudicating Authority held that the valuation of the goods sold by the assessee to Thomson India has to be determined as per rule 10A of the 2000 Rules and accordingly confirmed the demand of Rs. 2.08 crores with interest under Section 11AB and imposed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... boxes manufactured and sold by the assessee are liable to be valued on the basis of transaction value under Section 4(1)(a) of the 1944 Act. Whether Section 4(1)(a) of the Act applies and whether the Adjudicating Authority was not justified in invoking Rule 10A of the 2000 Rules is a question to be decided at the hearing of the appeal. 9. On the basis of the material on record, the Adjudicating Authority has arrived at a conclusion that the manufacture and sale of settop boxes by the assessee to Thomson India is based on the terms and conditions contained in the Memorandum of Understanding arrived at between the parent company of the assessee and the parent company of Thomson India. The Adjudicating Authority has recorded a finding that t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... inputs to the assessee through its sister concerns set out in the approved Vendors List at the price controlled / approved by the Thomson India. 10. In these circumstances, the prima facie view of the CESTAT that the Adjudicating Authority was justified in holding that Thomson India supplied the inputs to the assessee by persons authorized by Thomson India and, therefore, the assessee being a jobworker manufacturing goods on behalf of Thomson India would be covered under rule 10A of the 2000 Rules cannot be faulted. 11. Strong reliance was placed by the counsel for the assessee on the Bangalore Bench decision of the CESTAT in the case of Coromandel Paints Limited (supra) and an unreported judgment of this Court in the case Hyva (India) P ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
