Real judgements, distilled

Legal Case Shots

Court judgements broken down into the case type, how the decision played out, and the lesson worth remembering, with the full judgement available as a PDF.

Frequently asked questions

Is this suitable for use in legal research and court filings?+

Legal Case Shots is built to help you quickly identify and understand relevant precedent. For citation in pleadings or filings, always verify against the full judgment PDF and current citation format (e.g., 2026 INSC ___).

How is a "lesson learnt" different from the judgment's holding?+

The holding is what the court legally decided. The lesson learnt translates that into a practical takeaway: what a lawyer should factor into case strategy or client advice as a result of this precedent.

Is the full judgment available, or just a summary?+

Both. Each case shows a distilled summary (case type, key holding, and lesson learnt) and links to the full judgment as a PDF for when you need the complete text for research or citation.

Can I filter judgments by date or case type?+

Yes. Use Advanced Filters to narrow results by decision date and by practice area, including Constitutional Law, Criminal Law, Service & Administrative Law, Family Law, Civil Property & Inheritance, and Labour & Industrial Law.

Can I search judgments by a specific judge?+

Yes. You can filter judgments by the judge or bench that decided the case, which is useful for tracking how a particular judge has reasoned on similar issues across multiple rulings.

What is Legal Case Shots?+

Legal Case Shots is a searchable database of Supreme Court of India judgments, each broken down into the case type, the court's key holding, and a practical lesson learnt, with the full judgment available as a PDF for citation or deeper reading.

Tax & Customs LawSupreme Court of India

Commissioner of Customs (Port) Kolkata v. M/S. Steel Authority of India Ltd.

Civil Appeal · 2020 INSC 367Decided 27 Apr 2020
Civil Appeal No. 6398 of 2009
Justice Deepak Gupta · Justice Aniruddha Bose

Background

Steel Authority of India Ltd. (SAIL) imported plant and equipment from two foreign consortia for modernising its Durgapur plant, under contracts that also separately priced basic design/engineering fees, "as-built" drawings, and foreign supervision charges for erection and commissioning in India. Customs authorities added these design, drawing, and supervision charges to the invoice value of the imported equipment, treating the whole arrangement as a "turnkey" package where one part was a "condition" for the other. SAIL's appeals succeeded before the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), which held these charges related to post-importation activity and should not be added to the customs value; the Revenue appealed to the Supreme Court.

Decision Breakdown

The Supreme Court upheld the Tribunal, holding that merely because a contract has the broad shape of a "turnkey" project does not automatically mean every component is a "condition of sale" of the imported goods under Rule 9(1)(e) of the Customs Valuation Rules, 1988. Following its earlier rulings in Essar Steel and Tata Iron & Steel, the Court held that charges for design, drawings, and supervision that relate to post-importation activities (like erection, commissioning, and project implementation in India) are excluded from the assessable value unless there is specific material showing the supply of equipment was genuinely conditional on also buying those post-import services from the same supplier. Since the Revenue had not shown such a condition, SAIL could have used the designs and supervision from any source, the extra charges could not be added to the customs value, and the appeal was dismissed.

Lesson Learnt

When goods are imported along with separately priced services for installation or commissioning, customs duty can only be charged on the price of the goods themselves unless the authorities can specifically show that buying those extra services was a genuine precondition for the sale of the goods: a contract merely looking like a "turnkey" package is not, by itself, enough.

Commissioner of Customs (Port) Kolkata v. M/S. Steel Authority of India Ltd. – Legal Case Shots | LegalAware