Customs valuation of second-hand machinery upheld where no reliable evidence displaced the departmental depreciation-based assessment.

Depreciation under the customs valuation circular was applied to imported second-hand machinery, and the valuation was upheld because no reliable material showed the assessed value was incorrect. The argument that the depreciation ceiling should be extended after a change in import policy was rejected, as the earlier restriction on machinery not more than seven years old did not render older machinery non-importable or make the circular's ceiling irrelevant. In the absence of inspection-based valuation or contrary evidence, the departmental assessment remained undisturbed.

---

---

Issues: Whether the depreciation applied to the valuation of imported second-hand machinery under the Customs circular was excessive and whether the assessed value called for interference.

Analysis: The depreciation limit in the Board circular was applied to arrive at the value of the imported second-hand machinery. The contention that the limit should be extended because the import policy had changed was rejected. The earlier policy restriction regarding machinery not more than seven years old did not mean that older machinery could not be imported at all or that the circular's depreciation ceiling automatically lost relevance. The goods were not valued on inspection, and no material was produced to show that the assessed valuation was incorrect.

Conclusion: The valuation adopted by the customs authorities was upheld and no interference was warranted.

Final Conclusion: The appeal failed and the customs assessment of the imported second-hand machinery remained undisturbed.

Ratio Decidendi: In the absence of reliable material showing that the assessed customs value of imported second-hand machinery is incorrect, the valuation based on the applicable departmental circular will not be interfered with merely because of a change in import policy.

---