THE ANDHRA PETROCHEMICALSversusCOLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS, MADRAS

                       THE ANDHRA PETROCHEMICALS                                   A
                                          v.


-                    COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS, MADRAS

                                FEBRUARY 6, 1997

             [B.P. JEEVAN REDDY AND K VENKATASWAMI, JJ.)                           B

             Customs Valuation Determination of Price of Imported (goods) Rules,
    1988.

          Rule 9 r/w ~Import of equipment-Three separate agree- C
    ments-Whether a single transaction and are package deal-Held, Tribunal
    was right in holding the agreement relating to purchase of equipment cannot
    be disassociated from other agreements-Hence the authorities were right in
    loading the design and engineering charges on to the value of the imported
    equipment. '
                                                                                   D
             Clv1L APPELLATE JURISDIQTION : Civil Appeal No. 7351 of
    19!l3.

         From the Judgment and Order dated 30.7.93 of the Customs Excise
    and Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi in Custom Appeal No.
    C/1570 of 1992-A.                                                              E
             M. Chandrasekharan and C.N. Sree Kumar for the Appellants.

         M. Gauri Shankar Murthy, Y.P. Mahajan and V.K. Verma for the
    Respondent.
                                                                                   F
             Th~ following Order of the Court was delivered :

          We have heard the counsel for both the parties at some length. We
    have been taken through the three agreements concern herein, the orders
    of the Government of India and the Judgment of the Tribunal under
    appeal. We arc inclined to agree with the Tribunal that the three agree- G
    ments represent a single transaction between the appellant and Davy
    Mckee (London) Limited, U.K. and that they are in the nature of a ·
    package deal. It may be that all the equipment that was contemplated to
    be purchased abroad was not purchasi::d and that some of it was locally
    procured but what was imported was specially manufactured on the basis H
                                       991
         992                  SUPREME COURT REPORTS                  [1997] 1 S.C.R.
     A   of design and engineering specifications provided by Davy. We are of the
         opinion that the Tribunal was right in holding that the agreement relating
_,



     B
         to purchase of equipment cannot be dissociated from the other agreements
         and that the authorities were right in loading the design and engineering
         charges at Pounds 11.50 Lakhs on to the value of the imported equipment
         under Rule 9 read with Rule 4 of the Customs Valuation Determination
         of Price of Imported (goods) Rules, 1988. The facts set out by the Tribunal
                                                                                             -
         in Paras 32 to 34 do support the conclusion arrived at by it. We 1see no
         reason to differ from the view taken by thi:: Tribunal. The appeal accord-
         ingly fails and is dismissed. No costs.

     C G.N.                                                      Appeal dismissed .




                                                                                       ...