The Ahmedabad Bench of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), ruled that the redetermination of the transaction value based on the National Import Database (NIDB) data and Directorate General of Valuation (DGOV) circular is not sustainable.
The respondent in the matter is Chandan Exports and the revenue is in appeal before the Tribunal. On scrutiny of invoice pertaining to subject import, it appeared that the invoice price is on the lower side than the contemporaneous import of like/similar goods imported from same country of origin i.e. China.
Previously, similar goods imported by the importer under bill of Entry No. 00495 dated 20.12.2007 was assessed as per the valuation data sourced from Directorate of Valuation site and goods were cleared by the importer after paying duty as per loaded value.
The Counsel appearing for the department submitted that there was sufficient evidence to determine the value of the goods as per Rule 4 of the Valuation Rules by keeping the price at the level of the identical goods imported, it would not be correct to hold that the enhancement of value of the goods in OIO was not is accordance with Customs Valuation Rules, 2007.
In the case of Modern Manufacturers, the Tribunal held that enhancement of value of imported goods based on NIDB data and circular issued by DGOV without rejecting declared value under Rule 12 of Customs Valuation Rules, 2007 is not proper
The Coram comprising Ramesh Nair, Judicial Member and Raju, Technical Member held that “Redetermination of value based on NIDB data and DGOV circular is not sustainable. In the present case, no exercise of rejecting the declared value under Rule 12 and process of applying Valuation Rules sequentially were followed. Therefore, the value declared by the respondent has to be accepted.”
“There is merit in the contention of the respondent that the earlier assessment does not preclude them from protesting the enhancement of value on the same lines for subsequent imports. We also find that in the present matter there are no reasons recorded by the revenue for rejection of transaction value before taking the exercise of revaluation and enhancement of transaction value” the Bench concluded.
Subscribe Taxscan Premium to view the JudgmentSupport our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates
