2025 (12) TMI 123

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....entry No. 5064410 dated 27.04.2016, 5064413 dated 27.04.2016 and 5211918 dated 10.05.2016 for the clearance of imported goods, 'vitrified tiles' from China. The declared FOB price for 600 x 600 mm tiles was USD 5.60 to 9.5 per square meter and for 800 x 800 mm tiles was USD 6.66 to 21.00 per square metre, respectively. The Department alleging that the declared value was less as compared to contemporaneous import prices of similar goods imported through Cochin and other ports, rejected the declared value of the goods under Rule 12 of Customs Valuation Rules, 2017 and the value has been re-determined under Rule 5 of the Customs Valuation Rules, 2007 at USD 6.00/sq.mtr (CIF) for the 600x600mm 'Porcelain (vitrified) tiles' and U....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ejected, nor had given the Appellant an opportunity to substantiate the declared value; the value of the goods was enhanced without any reason thereby violated the Customs Valuation Rules, 2007 and the redetermination of value of imported goods was highly arbitrary, exorbitant and without any basis; there is no evidence or allegation that there was financial flow back of funds or an abnormal trade discount; the entire transaction value was paid through legal banking channels; the data relied upon by the Assessing Authority does not reflect any details as to the make, quality, colour, texture, design etc. of the goods taken for comparison. Thus, the settled position is that contemporaneous import values must be assessed after establishing th....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... goods imported vide 3(three) bills of entry based on the contemporaneous values of the similar goods available in National Import Data Base (NIDB). The importer contends that the reliance on the NIDB data without establishing that the goods match in terms of quality, quantity, country of origin and the time and place of import is not tenable. Further, we find that this Tribunal vide Final Order Nos. 20882 to 20887/2016 dated 04.10.2016 in Appeal Nos. C/22069/15, 22075/15, 22374/15, 22375/15, 22376/15 and 22347/15 has allowed the appeals filed by the appellant and two other importers holding that the customs did not have sufficient evidence/justifiable evidence to reject the invoice values of the imports. We find this case is squarely cover....