Just a moment...
Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the declared transaction value of imported second-hand machinery could be discarded and the assessable value determined under the residual method without a clear rejection of transaction value under the Customs Valuation Rules, 1988.
Analysis: The machinery was accompanied by a Chartered Engineer's certificate assessing the condition of the goods and indicating that the declared price was reasonable. The original authority accepted part of the certificate for estimating the value of new machinery, but disregarded the same certificate to the extent it supported the declared price. The governing principle is that the declared transaction value must first be rejected before recourse can be had to the sequential valuation rules and, finally, to the residual method. On the facts, the declared value was not properly discarded before resorting to Rule 8 of the Customs Valuation Rules, 1988.
Conclusion: The determination of value under the residual method was unjustified and the Revenue's challenge to the appellate order fails.
Ratio Decidendi: Transaction value under the Customs Valuation Rules, 1988 cannot be displaced and value cannot be determined under the residual method unless the declared transaction value is first validly rejected.