2018 (3) TMI 2015 - AT - Customs

Valuation of the stock lot of printing paper imported - no available price of contemporaneous goods even in NIDB data - NIDB data can be made the sole basis for rejection of the transaction value or not - HELD THAT - In terms of import of stock lot goods admittedly the price is a negotiated price and agreed upon by the importer and the supplier. The same has to be first rejected by the Customs authority by production of evidences which are positive and cogent. There being no such evidence in the present case to discard the transaction value the Revenue s contention of NIDB data cannot be allowed to be justifiable. There are no merits in the Revenue s stand - the impugned order is set aside - appeal allowed.

Summary

Issues: Valuation of imported printing paper stock lot

Valuation of Stock Lot:
The issue in this appeal pertains to the valuation of a stock lot of printing paper imported by the appellant. The Revenue contended that the declared value was low due to usable papers in the stock lot, resulting in an increase in duty, confiscation of goods, and penalties. The Commissioner relied on NIDB data to redetermine the assessable value. However, the Tribunal noted that stock lot goods involve negotiated prices agreed upon by the importer and supplier. Without positive and cogent evidence to reject the transaction value, reliance solely on NIDB data was deemed unjustifiable. The Tribunal cited precedents and emphasized the need for Customs authorities to provide evidence before discarding transaction values.

Precedents and Legal Analysis:
The Tribunal referred to decisions in cases like Venture Impex Pvt. Ltd. v. CC (I&G), New Delhi and Kelvin Infotech Pvt. Ltd. v. CCB & ST, Meerut, upheld by the Supreme Court. These cases underscored the importance of evidence-based rejection of transaction values in the context of imported stock lot goods. The Tribunal found no merit in the Revenue's argument, setting aside the impugned order and allowing the appeal with relief to the appellant.

This judgment highlights the significance of evidence in challenging declared values of imported goods, especially in cases involving negotiated prices such as stock lot goods. It underscores the need for Customs authorities to provide concrete evidence before rejecting transaction values based on external data sources like NIDB. The decision serves as a reminder of the legal principles governing the valuation of imported goods and the burden of proof on authorities to justify any deviations from declared values.