Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

In most of the cases the difference is too high when compared to the average increase/decrease in the LME price Internationally, as mentioned above. Hence, it appears that importer had highly undervalued the goods and the value declared by the importer is not true and accurate; and C/51688/2022 & 49 others (C) Further, the value shown in the NIDB data of contemporaneous imports at or about the same time also indicates that the value declared by the importer is significantly lower than the value at which the imported Aluminum scraps of a particular code/grade (as prescribed by the ISRI) are declared/ assessed in respect of another importers at other ports also. The vital difference between the declared value vis-à-vis reference value & value of contemporaneous imports appears to clearly indicates that the value declared by the importer is not true and accurate."

9. The said paragraphs are reproduced below:

"6. Since the importer has not submitted reply to the letter issued by this office, it appears that they have failed to submit any documentary evidence and plausible explanation regarding the gap observed between the value declared by them and the reference value determined in accordance with the DGoV Alert dated 15.11.2018 as well as value of contemporaneous imports of the Aluminum Scrap of particular code/grade (as per ISRI) at or about the same time. Thus, it appears that the importer has failed to establish the C/51688/2022 & 49 others truthfulness and accuracy about the value declared by them and the doubts raised by the proper officer about truth or accuracy of the value so declared are still remained unsatisfied, hence, in view of the provisions of rule 12(1) ibid the transaction value of such imported goods cannot be determined under the provisions of sub-rule (1) of Rule 3 ibid.

8. Further, as the value cannot be re- determined under Rules 4, 5, 7 & 8 of said Valuation Rules due to absence of information about identical and similar goods, and other factors referred to above, hence, the value is to be re-

C/51688/2022 & 49 others determined in accordance with the provisions of Rule 9 of the Customs Valuation (Determination of value of imported goods) Rules, 2007. Further, it also appears that difference in composition or origin may not have any material bearing on the value of the subject imported goods i.e. Aluminum Scrap, however despite such differences, the Aluminium scrap falling under a particular ISRI code / category remains 'Goods of the same class or kind' as defined in Rule 2(c) of the Customs (Determination of Value of imported goods) Rules 2007. Therefore, It appears that the value of the impugned goods is required to be re-determined on the basis of data pertaining to contemporaneous import of 'Goods of the same class or kind' in terms of Rule 9 of the said Valuation Rules read with Section 14, ibid regarding imports at other ports.