Declared transaction value requires fair opportunity to prove supporting documents before confiscation, enhancement and penalty are sustained.

Rejection of the declared transaction value for imported goods, and the resulting confiscation, value enhancement and penalty, could not be sustained without allowing the importer to produce original supporting documents and evidence. The value had been rejected on the basis of an earlier import of identical goods and an alleged misdeclaration, but the importer claimed the goods were sourced through a supplier at a discounted price and that the original invoice and correspondence were available. The impugned order was set aside and the matter remanded for fresh adjudication after granting an opportunity to file the relevant originals and be heard.

---

---

Issues: Whether the rejection of the declared value of the imported goods and the resulting confiscation, enhancement of value and penalty could be sustained without giving the importer an opportunity to produce original supporting documents and evidence.

Analysis: The declared transaction value was rejected on the basis of an earlier import of identical goods and an alleged misdeclaration of value. The importer asserted that the goods were procured through a supplier who had obtained them from the manufacturer at a discounted price and that supporting documents, including the original invoice and related correspondence, were available. Since those documents had not been produced before the adjudicating authority and the genuineness of the invoice was stated to be capable of proof, the matter required reconsideration after allowing production of the relevant originals and supporting evidence.

Conclusion: The impugned order was set aside and the matter was remanded to the adjudicating authority for fresh decision after granting the importer an opportunity to produce the relevant documents and to be heard.

---