ROSEMOUNT (INDIA) LTD Vs. COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE question for the consideration is the valuation of goods imported by the appellant from M/s Rosemount Inc. USA. In the order impugned in the appeal, the Collector (Appeals) has confirmed the finding of the Asst. Collector that the appellant Rosemount Inc. and the foreign collaborator were related and that by application of Rule 6 of the Customs Valuation Rule 1963, lump sum royalty payable by the appellant to the collaborators on the sales of the product made by the appellant were to be included in the assessable value of the goods imported by it. These goods consisted of components required by the appellant to manufacture electronic pressure transmitters.

(2.) THEN Advocate for the appellant raised the contention that the appellant and Rosemount Inc. are not related persons. For them to be related there has to be mutuality of interest and each of them must be shown to have interest in the business of the other. He does not dispute that the foreign collaborator had his interest in the appellant by virtue of the fact that it has a 40% stock holding in the appellant company. He however contends that there is no material to show that the appellant was interested in the business of the foreign collaborators. He relies upon the Tribunal in Varma Trafag Instruments Pvt. Ltd. v. CCE .

(3.) THE departmental representative adopts the reasoning in the impugned order.