Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding


  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2001 (9) TMI 179

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... a short compass, the miscellaneous application is allowed and the appeal is taken for disposal with the consent of both the parties. 3. The facts of the case are that the appellants imported feature films titled "Web of Silence - AIDS" in 35 mm print of 2569 Mtrs along with one trailer in 35 mm of 35 Mtr length and declared the value for the purpose of assessment as US $ 1000 and US $ 20 respectively totalling US $ 1020. It was noticed that the appellants paid US $ 12,500 towards Royalty including one brand new print and one Trailer (Rights of reproduction and distribution for public performance for the territories of India) - US $ 12,500/-. The appellants contended that in terms of Rule 9(1)(c) of the Customs Valuation Rules 1988 it is .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ht of the above mentioned rulings of World Customs Organisation and clear provisions of Rule 9(1)(c) of the Customs Valuation Rules, 1988 and the interpretation note to the above rules, there is no justification, whatsoever to include the royalties paid for computing assessable value of the films imported. 4. The lower authorities did not agree with their contention in view of the fact that there was no split up shown in the invoice with regard to royalty charges and distribution charges for asking exclusion in terms of the note to rule. Although the Commissioner agreed with them that the interpretative rules is acceptable, however, he has held that since the agreement did not give any break-up of the amount payable towards each of the ri .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e extent such royalties and fees are not included in the price actually paid or payable. In the instant case, the appellant had to pay not only the cost of movie materials but also the royalty for the rights specified in the Distribution Agreement as a condition of sale, for, without the right of re-production and distribution, the impugned goods viz. the print and the trailer will not be of any use to the appellant at all to enjoy the theatrical and video rights conferred on him. The appellant relies upon the Interpretative Notes of Rule 9(1)(c) to argue that charges for the right to re-produce the imported goods in the country of importation and payment made for the right to distribute or re-sell the imported goods shall not be added to .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... includable in terms of Rule 9(1)(c). The ratio of the honourable Apex Court's decision in the case of M/s. Essar Gujarat Ltd., and that of the honourable CEGAT in TDT Copper Ltd., v. CC, New Delhi [2000 (120) E.L.T. 265 (Trib.)] apply to the instant case. Though the appellant's plea that the fee paid for re-production is not includible as per the Interpretative Rules is acceptable, the agreement does not give any break-up of the amount payable towards each of the rights/licences granted to the appellant and as such exclusion of a portion of the total amount towards reproduction charges is not feasible. In view of this, the decisions/opinions cited by the appellant are not relevant and cannot come to his rescue. Accordingly, the lower a .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... hat in the present case we have to apply to the rulings given by the Hon'ble Apex Court and the Tribunal as noted by the Commissioner (Appeals) and there is no dispute that in the invoice the appellants have shown clearly royalty charges. Therefore, their plea that they are distribution charges has not been substantiated and also it does not disclose the split up value. There is also no supporting evidence and therefore, the declaration given in the invoice that they have paid charges in terms of the agreement is conclusive of the matter and there is no infirmity in the impugned order which has been extracted above. 7. On consideration of the submissions made, we notice that the aspect pertaining to includibility of "royalty charges" cann .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates