Customs valuation and transaction value rejection fail where contemporaneous imports are not proved with reliable, detailed comparables.

The declared transaction value of imported goods can be rejected only on reliable evidence; contemporaneous imports must be shown with sufficient particulars, including importer identity, quantity, grade, quality and unit price, before any enhancement is justified. Here, the Revenue relied on alleged contemporaneous imports without disclosing adequate particulars, while the importer produced material showing acceptance of the same or similar declared values in other imports and the Revenue produced no contrary evidence. The rejection of the declared value was therefore found unsustainable, and the declared value was accepted as the proper transaction value.

---

---

Issues: Whether the declared transaction value of the imported goods could be rejected and the assessable value enhanced on the basis of contemporaneous imports.

Analysis: The enhancement was made by rejecting the declared value under Rule 4 and applying Rule 5 of the Customs Valuation (Determination of Price of Imported Goods) Rules, 1988. The record showed that the Revenue relied on alleged contemporaneous imports, but the details of those imports were not disclosed with sufficient particulars such as importer identity, quantity, size, grade, quality and unit price. The appellant also produced material showing acceptance of the same or similar declared values by Customs in other imports, while the Revenue led no contrary evidence to displace the declared value. In these circumstances, the basis for rejecting the transaction value was found to be unreliable.

Conclusion: The declared value of USD 130 per CBM was held to be the proper transaction value and the enhancement made by the lower authorities was set aside.

---