Customs valuation rules require reliable comparables; NIDB data alone is insufficient, and the lowest contemporaneous import value applies.

Declared customs value cannot be rejected and enhanced merely on generalized NIDB data or on descriptions of other models; such material was found insufficient to support enhancement under the Customs Valuation Rules, so the rejection and enhancement on that basis were set aside. Where valuation was based on contemporaneous imports, the highest comparable value could not be adopted; the correct approach was to use the lowest comparable value, and the matter was remanded for fresh determination on that basis. The result was partial success for the assessee, with major value enhancements annulled and limited items sent back for revaluation using the proper comparable-value standard.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the declared transaction value of imported goods could be rejected and enhanced merely on the basis of NIDB data or descriptions of other models, and (ii) whether, for items valued with reference to contemporaneous imports, the highest comparable value could be adopted instead of the lowest comparable value.

Issue (i): Whether the declared transaction value of imported goods could be rejected and enhanced merely on the basis of NIDB data or descriptions of other models.

Analysis: The declared value had been rejected under Rule 12 of the Customs Valuation Rules, 2007 and the enhanced value was fixed under Rule 9 of the Customs Valuation Rules, 2007. The Tribunal found that for several items the enhancement rested only on NIDB data, while for some items no relevant database data was available and the enhancement was made by reference to other models or to a different import under dispute. Such material was held insufficient to justify enhancement of value under the valuation rules.

Conclusion: The rejection and enhancement of value on those bases was not sustainable and was set aside in favour of the assessee.

Issue (ii): Whether, for items valued with reference to contemporaneous imports, the highest comparable value could be adopted instead of the lowest comparable value.

Analysis: For certain items, valuation was based on contemporaneous imports, but the adjudicating authority had adopted the highest comparable value. The Tribunal held that the proper course was to adopt the lowest value among the contemporaneous imports and, where that exercise had not been correctly done, the matter required fresh determination on that basis.

Conclusion: The enhancement on this basis was set aside and the valuation issue for those items was remanded for re-determination using the lowest contemporaneous import value.

Final Conclusion: The appeal succeeded in part, with major enhancements of assessable value annulled and a limited set of items sent back for fresh valuation under the correct comparable-value standard.

Ratio Decidendi: Declared customs value cannot be enhanced merely on generalized NIDB data or unsuitable comparables, and where contemporaneous imports are relied upon, the lowest comparable value must be adopted for re-determination.

---