Customs valuation cannot rest on arbitrary loading without evidence; declared transaction value must be accepted when enhancement is unsubstantiated.

Declared customs transaction value cannot be enhanced by an arbitrary loading unless the authority substantiates the departure with cogent material and a reasoned basis. Here, the 5% loading of the declared import price was unsupported by any discernible evidence, and the remand direction requiring disclosure of the basis to the assessee was not complied with. The appellate authority also failed to examine that non-compliance. In the absence of other material justifying enhancement, the declared transaction value had to be accepted and the assessment founded on the loading was set aside.

---

---

Issues: Whether the declared import price could be loaded by 5% in the absence of supporting material and whether the consequent assessment and appellate order could be sustained.

Analysis: The loading of the declared import price was not supported by any discernible material. A valuation enhancement must rest on available evidence and cannot be based on an or arbitrary figure. The prior remand direction required the basis for the addition to be made available to the assessee, but the authority again failed to disclose any material justifying the 5% loading. The appellate authority also did not examine compliance with the earlier remand direction. In the absence of any other material, the declared transaction value was required to be accepted.

Conclusion: The 5% loading of the declared import price was unsustainable and the assessment based on it was set aside in favour of the assessee.

Ratio Decidendi: A declared customs transaction value cannot be rejected or enhanced by an arbitrary loading unless the authority substantiates the departure with cogent material and a reasoned basis.

---