Customs valuation and post-importation discounts: declared value must be re-examined where marketing expenses may be excluded from assessable value.

Declared value under customs valuation law could not be rejected without fully examining whether the contract-linked discounts were attributable to post-importation activities and post-exportation marketing expenses, which are not includible in the assessable value. Because the first appellate authority had not properly applied the valuation rule or addressed the factual matrix, the matter required fresh consideration on the existing record in accordance with natural justice. The rejection of the declared value was therefore not finally sustained, and the case was remitted for reconsideration.

---

---

Issues: Whether the declared value of imported goods could be rejected and the matter required fresh consideration under the Customs Valuation Rules, particularly where the contract indicated that the additional discounts were linked to post-importation expenses and post-exportation matters.

Analysis: The first appellate authority had not fully examined the factual matrix of the contract between the importer and the supplier. The valuation dispute required consideration of whether the additional discounts related to post-importation activities and marketing-related expenses, which are not to be included in the assessable value. The relevant valuation rule was not properly applied, and the matter needed reconsideration on the available record in accordance with the principles of natural justice.

Conclusion: The rejection of declared value was not finally sustained and the matter was remitted to the first appellate authority for reconsideration.

Ratio Decidendi: Under customs valuation law, costs attributable to post-importation activities and marketing-related expenses cannot be included in the assessable value, and where such aspects are not properly examined, remand for fresh adjudication is warranted.

---