Contemporaneous import data and valuation records required fresh scrutiny, leading to remand for de novo consideration.

Contemporaneous import data, Bill of Entry particulars and system-generated records were not properly examined at the original stage, and the valuation objection based on Rule 4 was not adequately addressed. As a result, the adjudication was found to require fresh factual scrutiny on the available material rather than final affirmation on the existing record. The matter was therefore remanded for de novo consideration of all issues, with an opportunity of personal hearing to the appellants.

---

---

Issues: Whether the valuation and adjudication required reconsideration on account of alleged non-consideration of contemporaneous import data and other documentary records, warranting remand to the original authority.

Analysis: The record showed that comparative import data, Bill of Entry particulars, and system-generated details relied upon by the appellants were not properly examined at the original stage. The appellants' contention that valuation ought to have been considered under Rule 4 was also not adequately dealt with. In these circumstances, the adjudication could not be regarded as fully justified on the material then considered, and a fresh fact-finding exercise was necessary on the available records and documents.

Conclusion: The matter was remanded to the original authority for de novo consideration of all issues, with an opportunity of personal hearing to the appellants.

---