Declared import value can be rejected for generic description and corroborated non-disclosure; later retraction did not defeat misdeclaration.

Imported goods described only in generic terms as cables and connectors could have their declared transaction value rejected where the record showed undisclosed brand, specifications and lengths, and market enquiry indicated the declared value was understated. The importer's voluntary statement admitting non-disclosure to reduce duty was treated as reliable because it was corroborated by surrounding circumstances, and the later retraction was considered an afterthought. The appellate relief was set aside and the adjudication confirming valuation enhancement, confiscation and penalty was restored in favour of the Revenue.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the declared value of the imported goods could be rejected and the assessable value re-determined on the basis of the materials on record. (ii) Whether the importer's earlier statement, later sought to be retracted, could be relied upon along with other circumstances to sustain the finding of misdeclaration.

Issue (i): Whether the declared value of the imported goods could be rejected and the assessable value re-determined on the basis of the materials on record.

Analysis: The goods were declared only in generic terms as cables and connectors, while the record showed that they were branded computer cables and connectors with specific specifications and lengths that had not been disclosed. Market enquiries and comparison with similar goods indicated that the declared value was on the lower side. The absence of full and accurate description affected the reliability of the declared transaction value and justified re-determination of value under the valuation rules.

Conclusion: The declared value was rightly rejected and the assessable value was validly re-determined; the finding was against the assessee.

Issue (ii): Whether the importer's earlier statement, later sought to be retracted, could be relied upon along with other circumstances to sustain the finding of misdeclaration.

Analysis: The importer had made a voluntary statement admitting that the specifications were not declared with a view to pay lesser duty and that the supplier was instructed accordingly. The later denial in reply to the show cause notice was treated as an afterthought. The earlier statement was supported by surrounding circumstances and corroborative material, and there was no sufficient basis to discard it merely because a retraction was attempted later.

Conclusion: The statement was admissible and reliable, and the finding of misdeclaration was sustained; the issue was against the assessee.

Final Conclusion: The appellate relief granted by the lower appellate authority was set aside, and the adjudication confirming valuation enhancement, confiscation, and penalty was restored, resulting in success for the Revenue.

Ratio Decidendi: Where imported goods are described only generically and the importer's own voluntary statement admits non-disclosure of specifications to reduce duty, the declared transaction value may be rejected and a later retraction will not defeat the finding if corroborated by surrounding circumstances.

---