Case Details: Lakshmi Access Communications Systems Pvt. Ltd. vs. Commissioner of Customs, Bangalore (2026) 38 Centax 310 (Tri.-Bang)
Judiciary and Counsel Details
- Dr. D.M. Misra, Member (J) & Shri Pullela Nageswara Rao, Member (T)
- Shri B.N. Gururaj, Adv., for the Appellant.
- Shri Maneesh Akhoury, Assistant Commissioner (AR), for the Respondent.
Facts of the Case
An assessee imported hardware of a navigation system described as a touch media device containing etched/embedded/preloaded software along with printed licence key numbers, and such hardware was cleared first. Invoices relating to the hardware and software import came together, and thereafter, a separate Bill of Entry was filed for a paper software licence as if it were an import of software only. The department contended that the value of the software was includible in the device’s value because it formed part of the device itself. The importer contended that the value of software imported separately could not be added to the value of the device that had been imported earlier. The matter was accordingly placed before Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT).
CESTAT Held
The CESTAT held that the portable navigation system had imprinted licence keys and preloaded software licence keys. It held that, in such circumstances, enhancement of the value of the touch media device by including the value of the licence software imported subsequently was proper. The tribunal applied Section 14 of the Customs Act, 1962, while examining the valuation of the imported goods. Accordingly, the appeals were partly allowed in favour of the department.
List of Cases Cited
- Anjaleem Enterprises Pvt. Ltd. v. Commissioner — 2006 (194) E.L.T. 129 (S.C.) — Referred [Paras 7, 9]
- Bhagyanagar Metals Ltd. v. Commissioner — 2016 (333) E.L.T. 395 (Tribunal-LB) — Followed [Paras 4.2, 7, 9]
- Commissioner v. Acer India Ltd. — 2004 (172) E.L.T. 289 (S.C.) — Referred [Paras 3.2, 4.2, 11]
- Commissioner v. Dilip Kumar and Company — 2018 (361) E.L.T. 577 (S.C.) — Referred [Para 4.2]
- Commissioner v. Grasim Industries Ltd. — 2018 (360) E.L.T. 769 (S.C.) — Distinguished [Paras 3.3, 10]
- Commissioner v. Hari Chand Shri Gopal — 2010 (260) E.L.T. 3 (S.C.) — Referred [Para 4.2]
- Commissioner v. Hindustan Lever Ltd. — 2002 (142) E.L.T. 513 (S.C.) — Referred [Para 3.2]
- Commissioner v. Vodafone Essar Guj. Ltd. — 2009 (237) E.L.T. 458 (Tribunal) — Referred [Para 3.2]
- PSI Data Systems Ltd. v. Collector — 1997 (89) E.L.T. 3 (S.C.) — Referred [Para 3.2]
- Union of India v. Bombay Tyre International Ltd. — 1983 (14) E.L.T. 1896 (S.C.) — Referred [Para 4.2]
List of Notifications Cited
- Notification No. 21/2002-Cus., dated 1-3-2002 [Paras 2, 3.1, 3.2, 4.1, 7, 8]
- Notification No. 29/2010-Cus. [Para 3.2]
