Transaction value under customs valuation cannot be rejected on vague contemporaneous import data without reliable comparable details.

Transaction value under Section 14 of the Customs Act, 1962 cannot be rejected merely because declared prices fluctuate or because contemporaneous imports through another port suggest a higher value. Reassessment under Rule 8 of the Customs Valuation Rules, 1988 requires reliable and relevant comparable material, including particulars of the goods, branding, contractual terms, payment structure, and whether the comparable assessments were themselves enhanced. Where such details are not disclosed to the importer and the foundation for comparison is incomplete, rejection of transaction value is not justified. On these facts, the reassessment was held unsustainable, with the differential duty and consequential penalty not surviving.

---

---

Issues: Whether the declared transaction value could be rejected and reassessed under the Customs Valuation Rules, 1988 on the basis of contemporaneous imports through another port.

Analysis: The declared prices showed fluctuations, but the reassessment rested mainly on data relating to imports through another customs port. The record did not disclose full particulars of those imports, including the nature of the goods, whether they were branded or unbranded, the contractual terms, payment structure, or whether the comparable assessments were themselves enhanced. Even under Rule 8 of the Customs Valuation Rules, 1988, reassessment required a proper legal and factual foundation. In the absence of reliable material and disclosure of comparable import details to the importer, the rejection of transaction value was not justified. The settled principle under Section 14 of the Customs Act, 1962 is that transaction value must be accepted unless valid reasons exist for rejection.

Conclusion: The rejection of transaction value and the reassessment under Rule 8 were unsustainable and were set aside.

Final Conclusion: The appeal succeeded, and the differential duty and consequential penalty did not survive.

Ratio Decidendi: Transaction value under Section 14 of the Customs Act, 1962 cannot be rejected on the basis of contemporaneous import data alone unless the comparable material is reliable, relevant, and disclosed so that a lawful reassessment can be made under the Valuation Rules.

---