Declared transaction value cannot be enhanced on journal quotations alone without evidence justifying rejection under valuation rules.

Declared transaction value of imported goods cannot be rejected merely because contemporaneous imports or international journal quotations show higher prices. Where the invoice price and contract price are supported by commercial circumstances and there is no evidence of flow back, extra-commercial consideration, or other special circumstance, the valuation rules do not permit rejection of transaction value. Journal quotations may indicate prevailing market prices on a given date, but they are not by themselves a valid basis for enhancement of assessable value. On the record, the conditions for rejection of declared value were not established, so value enhancement was not justified.

---

---

Issues: Whether the declared transaction value of the imported goods could be rejected and enhanced on the basis of contemporaneous imports and international journal quotations.

Analysis: The declared invoice price and contract price were supported by the surrounding commercial circumstances, and there was no material showing flow back of money, extra-commercial consideration, or any special circumstance warranting rejection of the transaction value. Prices reflected in international journals only indicate prevailing quotations on a given date and are not, by themselves, a valid basis for enhancement of assessable value. Rejection of transaction value is permissible only when the conditions under the valuation rules are satisfied, and those conditions were not established on the record.

Conclusion: The rejection of the transaction value was not justified and the value enhancement could not be sustained.

---