Just a moment...
Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the declared transaction value of imports from a related foreign supplier could be rejected and enhanced on the basis of alleged discriminatory discount, in the absence of positive evidence of flow back or other consideration.
Analysis: The assessing authority had accepted the declared value after examining the transfer price on a cost plus basis, comparing it with supplies to other related entities, and applying the deductive method under Rule 7 of the Customs Valuation Rules, 2007. The lower appellate authority rejected that approach without giving reasons to show why the declared value was unacceptable. Rule 12 of the Customs Valuation Rules, 2007 only indicates circumstances for rejection of transaction value and does not itself provide a valuation method. Once rejection is contemplated, valuation must proceed sequentially under the valuation rules. In the absence of contemporaneous imports by independent buyers and in the absence of any allegation or proof of flow back or extra consideration, there was no basis to discard the declared transaction value.
Conclusion: The rejection of the declared transaction value was unsustainable, and the importer succeeded in restoring acceptance of the value declared to customs.