Customs valuation of related-party imports requires proof that the relationship influenced price before rejecting declared transaction value.

Declared transaction value for imported components could not be rejected merely because the importer and supplier were related. The valuation authorities had to show material indicating that the relationship influenced the price or that extra consideration passed beyond the invoiced amount. Imports for assembly and imports of spare parts operated at different commercial levels, so the assumption that both must carry the same price was erroneous. The importer's separate procurement channels and pricing method supported acceptance of the declared value, and the transaction value was held to be acceptable on these facts.

---

---

Issues: Whether the transaction value of components imported for original equipment manufacturing could be rejected merely because the importer and supplier were related and the authorities treated components for assembly and spare parts as requiring the same price.

Analysis: The imports for assembly and the imports of spare parts were at different commercial levels. The relationship between the parties, by itself, did not justify rejection of the declared value when there was no material showing that the relationship influenced the price or that additional consideration flowed beyond the invoiced price. The authority's assumption that components for assembly and spare parts must necessarily have the same cost irrespective of end-use was erroneous, and the importer's explanation of separate procurement channels and pricing methodology supported acceptance of the declared value.

Conclusion: The rejection of the transaction value for components imported for assembly was not justified and the assessee succeeded on this issue.

Final Conclusion: The impugned valuation order was set aside and the assessee's appeal was allowed.

Ratio Decidendi: In customs valuation, declared transaction value between related persons must be accepted unless there is material showing that the relationship influenced the price or that the declared value is otherwise unjustified; different commercial levels and end-use can support distinct pricing.

---