Sequential customs valuation upheld for a used vehicle after value rejection, with redemption fine and penalty reduced.

Rejection of the declared transaction value of an imported used vehicle was justified where the invoice and Bill of Lading contained material discrepancies and the vehicle description did not fully match. Once the declared value failed, valuation had to proceed sequentially under the Customs Valuation Rules, 2007, and Rules 4 to 8 were inapplicable; Rule 9 was correctly applied on the basis of the UK list price with depreciation. The importer's cited case law was treated as distinguishable, but prior Bench reasoning supported partial relief on the monetary consequences, leading to reduction of the redemption fine and penalty.

---

---

Issues: Whether, after rejection of the declared transaction value of the imported used vehicle, valuation under Rule 9 of the Customs Valuation Rules, 2007 was justified and whether the redemption fine and penalty required reduction.

Analysis: The declared value was rejected because the invoice and Bill of Lading disclosed material discrepancies and the description of the vehicle was found not to match fully. In such a case, valuation had to proceed sequentially under the Customs Valuation Rules, 2007. The facts showed that Rules 4 to 8 were inapplicable, and the Department was justified in resorting to Rule 9. The Department's reliance on the UK list price and allowance of depreciation was therefore upheld. However, the case law relied on by the importer was found to be distinguishable, and the reasoning adopted in an earlier decision of the Bench justified some relief in the quantum of fine and penalty.

Conclusion: Rule 9 valuation was upheld, but the redemption fine and penalty were reduced.

---