Customs valuation under Rule 5 allows the nearest contemporaneous comparable import, even if it occurs shortly after the assessed import.

Under Rule 5 of the Customs Valuation Rules, 1988, the comparable import closest in time to the subject import may be used as contemporaneous evidence of value, even if it occurred shortly after the assessed import, unless the law expressly forbids that approach. The Commissioner (Appeals) was justified in preferring a comparable import seven days later over another import about two months earlier, because proximity in time was the relevant criterion for valuation. On that basis, the Revenue's proposed enhancement on the earlier comparable price was rejected.

---

---

Issues: Whether, for assessment of imported goods under Rule 5 of the Customs Valuation Rules, 1988, the value of comparable goods imported seven days after the subject import could be treated as more contemporaneous than a comparable import about two months earlier.

Analysis: The relevant comparison is the price and value of comparable goods closest in time to the import under assessment. No legal provision was shown to preclude reliance on a contemporaneous value/price recorded after the import when assessing an earlier import. In these circumstances, the Commissioner (Appeals) was justified in rejecting the Revenue's proposed comparable price from an import about two months earlier and in accepting the contemporaneous value of the import occurring seven days later.

Conclusion: The subsequent import was properly treated as the more contemporaneous comparable, and the enhancement proposed by the Revenue was rightly rejected.

Ratio Decidendi: Under Rule 5 of the Customs Valuation Rules, 1988, the comparable value closest in time to the import may be adopted as contemporaneous evidence of value, even if it pertains to an import occurring shortly after the subject import, unless the law expressly prohibits such use.

---