Transaction value and contemporaneous comparison rules barred value enhancement and confiscation of imported bobbin cases.

Assessable value of imported bobbin cases could not be enhanced by relying on an earlier import invoice because the cited import was of Japanese-origin goods made about one year earlier and in a much smaller quantity, so it was not a contemporaneous comparable. The record also lacked sufficient evidence to reject the declared transaction value. On the same evidentiary basis, confiscation for alleged misdeclaration of country of origin was unsustainable. The stated legal effect is that both enhancement of value and confiscation were not justified.

---

---

Issues: Whether the assessable value of the imported bobbin cases could be enhanced on the basis of an earlier import invoice and whether the goods were liable to confiscation for alleged misdeclaration of country of origin.

Analysis: The invoice relied upon by the Department related to Japanese-origin goods imported about one year earlier and in a much smaller quantity, and therefore could not be treated as a contemporaneous import for the present consignment of 50,000 pieces. The record also did not contain evidence sufficient to reject the declared transaction value. In these circumstances, the basis for both enhancement of value and confiscation failed.

Conclusion: The enhancement of assessable value and the order of confiscation were not justified, and the appeal succeeded.

---