Hari Enterprises Vs Commissioner of Customs (CESTAT Chennai)
In Hari Enterprises Vs Commissioner of Customs, CESTAT Chennai considered whether the rejection of the declared value of imported second-hand Fuji Printer Processors and the consequent enhancement of value were legally sustainable. The appellant had imported six used Fuji Printer Processors by filing a Bill of Entry dated 31.12.2014, declaring a value of JPY 640,000 supported by import documents and a Load Port Chartered Engineer (CE) Certificate. The department, considering the declared value to be low, enhanced it to JPY 36,00,000 based on a local Chartered Engineer’s Certificate.
The appellant argued that the enhancement was arbitrary and unsupported by evidence. It was submitted that the invoice, packing list, bill of lading, Load Port CE Certificate, protest letter, and request for a speaking order had been furnished, but these documents were not properly considered. The appellant also contended that the department failed to issue a speaking order despite a specific request made under Section 17(5) of the Customs Act.
The Tribunal observed that there was no allegation that the importer and supplier were related parties, that the transaction value had been influenced by any relationship, or that any amount beyond the declared consideration had been remitted to the supplier. It held that rejection of the transaction value required a reasonable basis supported by cogent evidence and communicated through a reasoned order.
