Related-party import valuation upheld where lower declared price was not satisfactorily explained against comparable imports.

The assessable value of imported consignments was enhanced after the importer, closely related to the foreign supplier and acting as its indenting agent, failed to justify a lower declared price against comparable imports. The earlier Special Valuation Branch acceptance of transaction value did not bar further scrutiny, because that order expressly allowed review on receipt of additional information. Given the relationship between the parties and the absence of a satisfactory commercial explanation for the price difference, the authorities were justified in drawing an adverse inference and adopting the higher comparable value. The re-assessment was therefore sustained.

---

---

Issues: Whether the enhancement of the assessable value of the imported consignments was justified on the ground that the importer was related to the foreign supplier and had not satisfactorily explained the lower declared price vis-a -vis comparable imports.

Analysis: The declared transaction value had earlier been accepted by the Special Valuation Branch on the basis of the importer's statements and disclosures, but that order itself contemplated review on receipt of additional information and did not foreclose further examination. The importer was closely related to the foreign supplier and also acted as its indenting agent. In that situation, the price declared by the importer could reasonably be tested against the price of identical goods imported from the same supplier and through the same vessel. The importer did not satisfactorily explain the difference in price or establish that the lower price was solely on genuine commercial considerations. The authorities were therefore justified in drawing an adverse inference and adopting the higher comparable value.

Conclusion: The enhancement of value was upheld and the challenge to the re-assessment failed.

---