TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (7) TMI 1786
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e Bill of Entry (BOE) No. 4057729 dated 12.12.2013 and declared the value at USD 670 per MT. They classified the above goods under CTH 27129030 of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975. It appeared to the department that the value declared by the appellant was low and not compatible with the provisions of section 14 of the Customs Act, 1962 (CA 1962), hence the proper officer enhanced the value of the goods to USD 830 per MT. The duty amount was paid under protest by the appellant. Aggrieved by the enhancement of value, the appellant preferred appeal before the Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) against the same. The Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) vide the impugned order rejected the appeal. Hence the present appeal before this Tribunal. 3. The Ld. Counsel Shr....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....aluation in import of residual wax / slack wax and the comparable price of slack wax as extracted from the import data supplied from UAE and data obtained from the NIDB data base. As recorded at para 2 of the impugned order, the appellant has stated that the NIDB data was neither made available to them nor shown to them before passing the assessment order. 4.1 The finding of the Original Authority is given at para 9 of the OIO which is extracted below; "I find that the issue to be decided in this case is the unit value of the goods imported. The imported had contended that value declared by them is the true value and actual transaction value for the purpose of assessment as per Rule 3 of Customs Valuation (Determination of Value of Impor....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....temporaneous import prices as well as current international prices of identical and similar goods, giving room to doubt the value declared. 6. While the NIDB data may serve as a guide for customs officers, however it cannot be directly applied without referring to specific Bills of Entry, data of which is given to the importer to defend his case. The specific rule of the Valuation Rules as per which the value is sought to be reassessed should also be disclosed. 7. We find that a similar issue has been dealt with in detail in the appellant's own case by this Tribunals Final Order Nos. 40714 & 40715/2025 dated 8.7.2025, except that the said Order-in-Appeal, was passed against the assessed Bill of Entry as no OIO came to be issued. The impug....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ority while rendering his findings, on the assessment based on the Bills of Entry, has stated as under, at para 5 of the impugned order; "5. . . . It reveals from the records that the appellants filed the said two Bills of Entry for their imported goods and declared the value at USD 600/MT as transaction value for the purpose of assessment under Rule 3 of CVR, 2007. There is a huge variation between the declared value and the value of the similar identical goods available as per the NIDB database. The invoice is the basis of the value of the goods, but such value could not be taken as the true transaction value as the price actually payable for the goods when sold for export to India for delivery at the time and place of importation (as p....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....er arguments and case laws put forth by the appellants do not come to their help, as they have no relevance to the case in hand. In view of the foregoing there is no ground to interfere with the subject assessment orders Accordingly the following order is passed." (emphasis added) 7. Prima facie we observe that the Ld. First Appellate Authority has misunderstood the law. The valuation of the imported goods are to be determined by the transaction value of such goods which is the the price actually paid or payable for the goods when sold for export to India. There is no room for the value declared for goods to be deemed to be the price at which such like goods are ordinarily sold or offered or sale. The concept of 'deemed price' had been gi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ss, but they cannot by themselves be raised to the status of substantial evidence. Section 14 of CA 1962 enables the revenue to raise an inference against an assessee on the basis of tangible material and not on mere suspicion, conjectures or perceptions. The Assessing Officer must collect facts, confront the assessee, and allow for explanation. When the First Appellate Authority exercise the role and powers of the original authority he is also expected to follow the same process. If the assessee fails to provide a credible explanation, the Assessing Officer can raise an inference of a wrongly declared value and proceed sequentially in the manner provided in the Valuation Rules. We do not find any such procedure having been followed. 9. W....