Customs | Direct Reliance On NIDB Data For Re-Assessment Of Import Value Not Permissible: CESTAT Kolkata

R. Muralidhar (Judicial Member) and K. Anpazhakan (Technical Member) noted that the adjudicating authority straightaway has re-determined the value on the basis of NIDB data retrieved, indicating the Bill of Entry and the description of the goods, which is legally not maintainable.

In the case at hand, the assessee/appellants imported Consignments of Water Purifier Spare Parts from an overseas supplier. The prices were declared as per the commercial invoices enclosed with each of the above-referred bill of entry.

The goods were assessed in the Assessing group on the basis of the invoice submitted by the importer and the declaration made in the Bill of Entry after enhancing the values of the two items out of the five items in the Bill of Entry.

Further investigation was conducted by the SIB (Port), and on examination of the goods in the Dock, it was alleged that the goods were grossly misdeclared in terms of description and value, and representative samples were drawn for further investigation.

After examination and scrutiny of the goods, it was presumed that the importer had misdeclared the description of the goods, specifically the membrane of the RO filter.

After examination of the goods by the SIB officers, the importer agreed to the enhancement of value as per DOV (Data of Valuation) data because of the huge mounting rent of CFS (Container Freight Station) and container detention charges.

A show-cause notice was issued to the assessee. The Adjudicating authority passed an order wherein the declared value of the imported goods was rejected and re-assessed duty of Rs. 30,84,594/- u/s 17(4) of the Customs Act, 1962 was levied along with differential duty of Rs.29,02,556/- with applicable interest u/s 28AA of the Act.

The assessee stated that the declared value of the imported goods is the true transaction value. It is not the case that it is the only and first import of the assessee. Prior to this, the assessee imported four consignments, which were duly cleared by the Customs authorities. But without any consideration, the R.O. membrane imported was compared with R.O. membrane imported against another Bill of Entry without any material evidence establishing that the quality of the R.O. membrane imported in the instant case is the same and cleared as per the NIDB data is also the same or similar in all respects.

The revenue argued that the assessee had mis-declared and also under-valued the imported consignment. Only after a detailed investigation it was found that even for the earlier consignments imported by the assessee, the value of similar goods was on the higher side. Therefore, the NIDB data for the nearest time of import was obtained, and the same was applied to arrive at the correct Assessable Value.

The bench found that the end result of this investigation has resulted in rejecting the value adopted by the assessee and applying of NIDB data to enhance the value.

The Tribunal stated that directly moving to NIDB data for enhancing the value, without first discarding the 'transaction value' with plausible reason, is erroneous on part of the Revenue.

The bench held that the Transaction Value cannot be discarded without any proper and cogent evidence, and NIDB Data cannot be applied directly to enhance the value.

In view of the above, the Tribunal allowed the appeal.

Case Title: M/s Eagle International v. Commissioner of Customs (Port), Kolkata

Case Number: Customs Appeal No. 75332 of 2023

Counsel for Appellant/ Assessee: S. C. Ratho

Counsel for Respondent/ Department: Faiz Ahmed

Click Here To Read/Download Order