Declared import value cannot be enhanced on internal reports alone without contemporaneous import evidence or voluntary acceptance.

Declared import value cannot be rejected on the basis of internal departmental letters alone where the importer accepted the value only to avoid detention and demurrage, making the consent non-voluntary. The challenge to enhancement was maintainable because the cited precedents involved voluntary acceptance without protest and were therefore distinguishable. Rejection of transaction value under the valuation rules required examination of contemporaneous import evidence, including NIDB or comparable data, which was not done. On those facts, enhancement of assessable value was not sustainable and the assessment based on the enhanced value was set aside.

---

---

Issues: Whether the rejection of the declared transaction value and enhancement of assessable value could be sustained when the importer's consent was not voluntary and the adjudication did not rest on contemporaneous import data.

Analysis: The declared value was accepted only to avoid detention and demurrage charges, so the consent could not be treated as voluntary. The precedents relied on for barring a challenge to enhancement were distinguishable because they concerned voluntary acceptance without protest. The assessment also did not examine contemporaneous NIDB or import data, and instead relied on valuation-related letters from departmental authorities. Rejection of declared value under the valuation rules had to be supported by contemporaneous import evidence, not merely by such internal reports.

Conclusion: The enhancement of value was not sustainable and the importer was entitled to challenge the assessment. The impugned order was set aside and the appeals were allowed.

Final Conclusion: The declared transaction value could not be displaced on the facts found, and the assessment based on enhanced value was annulled.

Ratio Decidendi: A declared import value cannot be rejected and enhanced merely on internal departmental material where the importer's acceptance was under protest and contemporaneous import evidence is not examined.

---