Uniform valuation of project imports required fresh adjudication where multiple consignments produced conflicting assessments across ports.

Valuation of second-hand refinery machinery imported under multiple consignments was required to be examined afresh by one common original authority, because the imports formed part of a single refinery project under one overseas contract and the assessments had proceeded on conflicting approaches across different ports. As the provisional assessments were not consistently determined and one valuation basis had itself been set aside, a uniform and complete reassessment of all consignments and evidence was necessary. The matter was therefore remanded de novo for fresh adjudication and re-determination of value, without entering into the merits of the valuation dispute.

---

---

Issues: Whether the dispute relating to valuation of second-hand refinery machinery imported under multiple consignments through different ports should be remanded for fresh determination by a common original authority.

Analysis: The imports related to one refinery project under a single contract with the overseas supplier, though the consignments were cleared through different ports and under separate bills of entry. The assessments were provisional, and different authorities had adopted conflicting approaches by either enhancing value on the basis of a local chartered engineer's report or relying mechanically on the Chennai order, which itself had been set aside. In these circumstances, and without entering into the merits of the valuation dispute, a fresh determination by one competent authority was considered necessary to ensure uniformity and a complete examination of all consignments and evidence.

Conclusion: The matter was remanded de novo to the original authority for fresh adjudication and re-determination of value.

---