Customs authorities violated natural justice by rejecting declared value without providing market enquiry report to importer

CESTAT Chennai held that customs authorities violated principles of natural justice by rejecting declared value of imported electronic calculators without providing the market enquiry report and worksheet to the appellant. The court noted that CVR 2007 Rule 12 allows rejection of declared values to address manipulated invoices, but proper procedure must be followed. Since the appellant was denied opportunity to respond to the market survey findings used for valuation redetermination, the matter was remanded to original authority for fresh adjudication after providing required documents to appellant.

---

---

The legal judgment involves an appeal against an order by the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals - II), Chennai, concerning the redetermination of the assessable value of imported electronic calculators. The core issues and their detailed analysis are as follows:

1. Issues Presented and Considered

The primary issues considered in this appeal are:

• Whether the declared value of the imported calculators should be rejected and redetermined based on the Customs Valuation (Determination of Price of Imported Goods) Rules, 2007 (CVR 2007).
• Whether the principles of natural justice were violated due to the non-disclosure of the market enquiry report to the appellant.

2. Issue-wise Detailed Analysis

Rejection and Redetermination of Declared Value

The relevant legal framework involves Rule 12 of the CVR 2007, which allows a proper officer to reject the declared value if there is a reasonable doubt about its truth or accuracy. The court referred to the Supreme Court's interpretation in Century Metal Recycling Pvt. Ltd. v. Union of India, which outlines the procedural steps for rejecting a declared value and determining a new value under Rules 4 to 9 of CVR 2007.

The court noted that the original authority had reasonable doubt about the truth or accuracy of the declared value due to the abnormally low unit price and Retail Sale Price (RSP) declared for the calculators. The original authority followed the first stage of redetermination by rejecting the declared value but failed to provide the appellant with the market enquiry report used to determine a new value, violating principles of natural justice.

Principles of Natural Justice

The court emphasized the importance of adhering to principles of natural justice, particularly the right to be heard and the right to receive evidence used against a party. The failure to provide the market enquiry report to the appellant denied them the opportunity to respond adequately, thus violating these principles.

The court referenced the case of Commissioner of Sales Tax, U.P. v. R.P. Dixit Saghidar, which supports remanding a case for de novo adjudication when there is a violation of natural justice.

3. Significant Holdings

The court held that the original authority had a reasonable basis to doubt the declared value but failed to comply with procedural requirements by not providing the market enquiry report to the appellant. This omission constituted a violation of the principles of natural justice.

The court concluded that the matter should be remanded to the original authority for fresh adjudication. The original authority must provide the appellant with the market enquiry report and worksheet, allowing them to respond before issuing a new decision. This process must adhere to the principles of natural justice, ensuring the appellant has a reasonable opportunity to present their case.

The appeal was disposed of with the direction for de novo adjudication, and the appellant was granted eligibility for consequential relief as per the law.

---