Customs valuation of imported vehicle upheld where invoice was not genuine, and redemption on fine was permitted.

Where the declared invoice did not reflect a genuine transaction, the assessable value of the imported vehicle was re-determined by sequential application of the Customs Valuation Rules and resort to Rule 9 after excluding Rules 4 to 8. The appellate reasoning accepted that the invoice price could not be treated as the transaction value, and the re-determined value was upheld. On confiscation, absolute confiscation was set aside because redemption of the vehicle on payment of fine was considered justified on the facts, and the objection that re-export should have been ordered was rejected. The revenue appeal therefore failed, leaving the redemption and valuation findings undisturbed.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the assessable value of the imported vehicle was correctly re-determined under Rule 9 of the Customs Valuation Rules, 2007. (ii) Whether the confiscated vehicle could be redeemed on payment of fine instead of ordering re-export.

Issue (i): Whether the assessable value of the imported vehicle was correctly re-determined under Rule 9 of the Customs Valuation Rules, 2007.

Analysis: The invoice produced by the importer was found not to reflect a genuine transaction between the invoice issuer and the importer. The original authority had recorded detailed reasons for rejecting the declared value, and the appellate authority accepted that the invoice price could not be treated as the transaction value. The assessable value was determined by applying the valuation rules sequentially and resorting to Rule 9 after excluding Rules 4 to 8.

Conclusion: The re-determination of assessable value was upheld.

Issue (ii): Whether the confiscated vehicle could be redeemed on payment of fine instead of ordering re-export.

Analysis: The appellate authority found sufficient reasons to set aside absolute confiscation and permit redemption of the vehicle on payment of fine. No infirmity was found in that reasoning, and the revenue's objection that re-export should have been directed was not accepted.

Conclusion: Redemption of the vehicle on payment of fine was upheld.

Final Conclusion: The revenue appeal failed, and the order permitting redemption while sustaining the re-determined value remained undisturbed.

Ratio Decidendi: Where the declared invoice does not represent a genuine transaction value, the assessable value may be re-determined by sequentially applying the valuation rules, and confiscation need not be absolute if redemption is justified on the facts.

---