Supreme CourtDivision Bench(2015) 05 SC CK 0050

Commissioner of Cus. (General), Mumbai - Appellant @HASH Reliance Industries Ltd.

Supreme Court Of India · Decided on 11 May 2015 · Citation: (2015) 320 ELT 25 : (2015) 14 SCC 740

HON’BLE JUDGES
A.K. Sikri and Rohinton Fali Nariman, JJ.
RESULT
Partly Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Civil Appeal Nos. 1429-1431 of 2005.

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

10 paragraphs · 310 words
1.

Perusal of the impugned order passed by the Tribunal [2005 (191) E.L.T. 803 (Tribunal)] reveals that the Tribunal formulated as many as seven issues for determination and decided those issues in the said order. In the appeal filed by the Department though the findings of the Tribunal were challenged, the appeal was, however, admitted limited to the issues 4 and 5. These are as under :

Issue No. (iv) : Whether concessional rate of duty applicable to Project imports will be available to import of PTA and Paraxylene Plant and goods imported under OGL.

Issue No. (v) : Whether know-how fee of US $ 24.60 million or any part thereof is required to be included in the assessable value of the imported equipments :-

2.

The answer to the aforesaid issues is as under :

4.

The benefit of project import regulations is available to PTA plant and Paraxylene Plant and goods imported under OGL.

5.

The question of includibility of know-how fees in the assessable value of imports is remitted to the Commissioner for revaluation.

3.

In respect of both these issues, as is clear from the above, the matter is remitted back to the Commissioner for deciding these issues available for want of adequate material before the Tribunal.

4.

Having regard to the aforesaid, it is not even necessary to decide these issues by this Court as we would also be constrained in taking up these issues for want of adequate material. Thus, we find that the Tribunal has rightly remitted these issues back to the Commissioner for decision in the light of its observation made in respect of these two issues.

5.

The appeals are, accordingly, dismissed.

6.

We direct the Commissioner to take up these issues and decide the same as early as possible and preferably within six months from the date of this order.