Declared export value cannot be displaced by moisture reports or contemporaneous prices when invoice and bank realisation support it

Where export value is supported by the final invoice and bank realisation certificate, laboratory moisture reports cannot be used to rework export quantity or finalise shipping bills. In the absence of any allegation of additional consideration or other valid reason to discard the declared price, the transaction value should not be rejected and replaced with contemporaneous export prices under the Customs Valuation Rules. The document also rejects splitting the consignment to apply a higher basic customs duty rate to part of the goods as iron ore lumps, stating that duty must be assessed on the correct characterization of the consignment and the proper valuation basis.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the moisture content determined from laboratory test reports could be used to rework the export quantity and finalize the shipping bills. (ii) Whether the declared transaction value could be rejected and substituted by contemporaneous export prices under the Customs Valuation Rules. (iii) Whether the higher rate of basic customs duty could be applied to a part of the consignment as iron ore lumps.

Issue (i): Whether the moisture content determined from laboratory test reports could be used to rework the export quantity and finalize the shipping bills.

Analysis: The export contracts were for specific grade and quality of iron ore and contemplated testing of Fe content and moisture at the discharge port. The final invoice was issued on that basis and the sale consideration stood realized, as reflected in the bank realisation certificate. In that situation, the moisture content from the laboratory report was not a proper basis to alter the quantity for final assessment.

Conclusion: The issue is decided in favour of the assessee.

Issue (ii): Whether the declared transaction value could be rejected and substituted by contemporaneous export prices under the Customs Valuation Rules.

Analysis: The declared price was provisional and stood firmed up by the final invoice and the bank realisation certificate. In the absence of any allegation of additional consideration or any valid ground for discarding the declared price, there was no justification to bypass the transaction value and adopt contemporaneous export prices for reassessment.

Conclusion: The issue is decided in favour of the assessee.

Issue (iii): Whether the higher rate of basic customs duty could be applied to a part of the consignment as iron ore lumps.

Analysis: The larger consignment had already been the subject of settled judicial treatment, and the methodology of splitting the consignment to levy a higher rate on a part of it was not accepted. The applicable rate was to be applied to the consignment on the basis of the correct characterization of the goods.

Conclusion: The issue is decided in favour of the assessee.

Final Conclusion: The impugned assessments and refund determinations could not be sustained on the adopted methodology, and the matter required fresh determination on the correct basis of the final invoice and bank realisation certificate.

Ratio Decidendi: Where export value is supported by the final invoice and bank realisation certificate and no valid ground exists to discard the declared price, the declared transaction value cannot be rejected by resorting to laboratory moisture reports or contemporaneous export prices, and duty must be finalized on the correct valuation basis.

---