Customs valuation based on comparable imports failed where identical goods and a small value difference did not support under-valuation.

Enhancement of the declared value of imported floppy disk drives was examined against comparable imports and customs valuation rules. The goods were treated as identical goods from the same foreign manufacturer, and the enhancement relied on another invoice after the authority stated that no contemporaneous imports were available to apply the earlier valuation rules and proceeded under Rule 8. An earlier matter involving identical goods from the same manufacturer had already resulted in a comparable enhancement and was affirmed. On the facts, the difference of about 10% between the declared and enhanced values was found insufficient to sustain under-valuation, so the enhancement was held unsustainable and the appeal was allowed with consequential relief.

---

---

Issues: Whether the enhancement of the declared value of imported floppy disk drives was justified on the basis of comparable imports and the valuation rules.

Analysis: The imported goods were found to be identical goods manufactured by the same foreign manufacturer, and the valuation had been enhanced by relying on another invoice and by proceeding under Rule 8 after stating that no contemporaneous imports were available to apply Rules 5 and 6. The Tribunal noted that in an earlier matter concerning identical goods of the same manufacturer, the Commissioner had enhanced the value to a level comparable with the present dispute and that order had been affirmed. The difference between the declared value and the enhanced value in the present case was only about 10%, which was treated as insufficient to sustain the allegation of under-valuation in the facts of the case.

Conclusion: The enhancement of value was not sustainable and the appeal was allowed with consequential relief.

---