Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Commissioner of Customs Vs. thermon Heat Tracers Ltd.

Commissioner of Customs vs thermon Heat Tracers Ltd.

Type Court Judgment Court Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai Decided Jun 14, 2005
~1 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/39355

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Judge
Decided On
Subject
Service Tax

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Service Tax

Key legal issue
Service Tax

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Commissioner of Customs

Respondent

thermon Heat Tracers Ltd.

Legal References

Reported In
(2005)(187)ELT110Tri(Mum.)bai

Excerpt

1. the issue for determination in this appeal of the revenue is whether royalty of 5% can be added to the value of imported component used by the importer/respondent in the manufacture of its products namely heat tracing cables and heat transfer cement.2. we have heard learned sdr and perused the record. none appears for the respondents in spite of notice. we find that royalty is payable on indigenous value addition of the product. it cannot be added to the value of imported components. reliance placed by the revenue on the decision of the apex court in pepsi foods ltd. v. commissioner - 2004 (171) e.l.t. a129 (s.c.) is misplaced for the reason that the question before the apex court was the inclusion of royalty collected from bottlers on beverages manufactured from concentrate supplied by the assessee in the assessable value of the concentrates sold, and issue did not relate to addition of royalty to value of imported item. we, therefore, see no merit in the present appeal and accordingly dismiss the same.

Full Judgment

1. The issue for determination in this appeal of the Revenue is whether royalty of 5% can be added to the value of imported component used by the importer/respondent in the manufacture of its products namely Heat tracing cables and Heat transfer cement.

2. We have heard learned SDR and perused the record. None appears for the respondents in spite of notice. We find that royalty is payable on indigenous value addition of the product. It cannot be added to the value of imported components. Reliance placed by the Revenue on the decision of the Apex Court in Pepsi Foods Ltd. v. Commissioner - 2004 (171) E.L.T. A129 (S.C.) is misplaced for the reason that the question before the Apex Court was the inclusion of royalty collected from bottlers on beverages manufactured from concentrate supplied by the assessee in the assessable value of the concentrates sold, and issue did not relate to addition of royalty to value of imported item. We, therefore, see no merit in the present appeal and accordingly dismiss the same.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial