Valuation (Customs) — Whether payment made or that which is
payable under contract, to be taken into account for determining valuation ?
(2) Valuation (Customs) — Technology
fee (by whatever title called), whether dutiable ? (3) Duty liability on import
of technology fee — Whether assessee or joint venture association, liable to pay
duty ? (4) Demand — Limitation
— Suppression — Whether a Public Ltd. Co. cannot be accused of suppression or
mis-representation and whether intent to evade material for invoking larger
period under Section 28 of Customs Act, 1962.
The Supreme Court Bench comprising Hon’ble Mr. Justice Syed
Shah Mohammed Quadri and Hon’ble Mr. Justice S.N. Phukan on 12-7-2001 admitted the Civil Appeal No. 3981 of
2001 filed by Electronics Corporation of India Ltd. against the CEGAT Order
Nos. 375-76/2001-WZB/C-II, dated 15-2-2001 and reported in [2001 (137) E.L.T. 1031 (Tri. - Mumbai)] (Electronic Corporation of India v. Commissioner). While admitting the appeal, the Supreme Court passed
the following order :-
“Appeal
is admitted.
No
stay.”
The
Appellate Tribunal vide impugned order had held that for determining valuation
it is not material whether the payment has been made, but the amount payable
under the contract has to be taken into account. Appellate Tribunal held that
technology fee (by whatever title called), is dutiable and joint venture
association being child of convenience, assessee (petitioner herein) only
liable for payment of such duty.
Plea
of assessee that being a Public Ltd. Co., they cannot be accused of suppression
or mis-representation, not accepted by Appellate Tribunal. Further, the ‘intent
to evade’ also held as not material for invoking larger period of limitation
under Section 28(1) of Cutoms Act, 1962.
___________