Transaction value of old stock cannot be rejected merely because it differs from the manufacturer's price list.

Declared transaction value for old bearings sold in a stock clearance sale was accepted because the goods were 5-10 years old, discounts could commercially apply, and no evidence showed that the declared price was not the actual price paid or payable. The manufacturer's price list was held not to be conclusive proof of value, so the declared value could not be rejected merely for differing from that list. On that basis, enhancement of value was unsustainable.

---

---

Issues: Whether the declared transaction value of old bearings sold in a stock clearance sale could be rejected and the value enhanced on the basis of the manufacturer's price list.

Analysis: The bearings were found to be 5-10 years old and were sold as old stock in a clearance sale, where higher discounts could commercially be offered. No evidence was brought on record to show that the declared transaction value was not the actual value paid or payable. In such circumstances, the manufacturer's price list could not be treated as conclusive proof of value, and the declared value could not be rejected merely because it differed from the list price.

Conclusion: The declared transaction value was accepted, and the enhancement of value was unsustainable.

Ratio Decidendi: Where imported goods are sold from old stock in a stock clearance sale and the declared price is not shown to be false, the transaction value cannot be rejected merely on the basis of the manufacturer's price list.

---