2017 (3) TMI 406 - AT - Customs

Valuation of imported goods - lining material - NIDB data was used by Customs to be representative data for Revenue to disturb the value declared by the appellant - Held that - NIDB data is not substitute of evidence. Therefore, fair adjudication is expectation of law confronting the materials supporting the NIDB data for rebuttal by the appellant - appeal allowed by way of remand.

Summary

Issues:
1. Determination of assessable value of imported goods.
2. Misdeclaration of goods' description and enhancement of assessable value.
3. Dispute over the valuation based on NIDB data.
4. Directions for readjudication by the Adjudicating Authority.

Analysis:

1. The appellant argued that the assessable value of the imported goods should not be enhanced to the degree at which shirting material commands, as the goods were lining material, not shirting material. The focus was on determining the correct assessable value based on the nature of the goods imported.

2. The appellant contended that in the absence of any misdeclaration of the goods' description, there should not be an enhancement of the assessable value. The argument was centered around the importance of accurate description and valuation of the imported goods.

3. The Revenue asserted that the assessable value was enhanced due to the branded shirting material commanding a high price upon importation. The dispute over valuation was based on the usage of NIDB data by Customs to challenge the value declared by the appellant, emphasizing the need for a thorough reevaluation.

4. The Tribunal directed the Adjudicating Authority to reexamine the matter, providing specific directions. These included determining the imported goods' nature, checking for misdeclaration, valuing the import correctly, and granting the appellant a fair opportunity to defend at every stage of the process. The Authority was also instructed to consider the imposition of redemption fine and penalty in accordance with the law, emphasizing the importance of fair adjudication and evidence-based decision-making.

Overall, the judgment highlighted the significance of accurate valuation, proper description of goods, and fair adjudication in customs matters, providing clear directives for the Adjudicating Authority to follow in reevaluating the case and issuing a reasoned order within a specified timeframe.