PRODELIN INDIA P. LTD. Vs. CCE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) M /S. Prodelin India (P) Ltd., is a Joint Venture between M/s. Prodelin Corporation, USA and Mr. Ashok Mago of New Delhi. The joint venture was set for purpose of assembly and installation of antennae. For the said purpose the appellant joint venture imported antenna part from their foreign partner. Customs authorities took the view that, since the transaction was between related parties, the purchase price of the join venture cannot be accepted for the purpose of assessment of the imported antennae parts to duty. The appellant resisted the proposal by pointing out that the price is the full and sole consideration for the imported goods and such a transaction value rightly constitute the assessable value for the purpose of customs assessment. Under the impugned order, Commissioner held that apart from the fact that the import is from joint venture partner, the transaction is also affected by a technical agreement between the parties where under an amount of US 2,58,000 was payable as technical services fees for services. The Commissioner also held that the fees paid is not only for post import assistance as contended by the appellant, but it is also for pre -import functions such as supply of design, drawing, fabrication drawing, etc. He, therefore, held that the relation between the two companies would have a bearing on the value of imported goods. The Commissioner, therefore, upheld the order of the Deputy Commissioner ordering addition of 10% to the invoice value of the goods imported from M/s. Prodelini Corporation, USA for the purpose of assessment.

(2.) WE have heard both sides and perused the records. The addition to the import price is ordered in view of the following clause in the services agreement dated 1.10.97 between the parties :

(3.) THE submissions of the appellant is that the above clause in no way, relates to the price of goods purchased from the foreign partners. It only provides for assistance of the foreign partner in design and manufacture of goods in India. This position wa emphasized by the learned counsel for the appellant. The Counsel also pointed out that the appellant's case is covered by the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Daewoo Motors India Ltd. v. CC, New Delhi - 2000 (115) ELT 489 (T) and NEG Micon (India) Pvt. Ltd. v. CC, Chennai - 2004 (170) ELT 29.