KARACHI: The review petition filed by M/s Kinjhar International against Valuation Ruling No. 50/2014 has been rejected as the importers failed to substantiate their claim.
In its order, the Director General, Directorate General of Customs Valuation remarked that the case had been examined and the arguments put forward by the petitioner have been considered.
The petitioner was asked through a letter dated May 22, 2014 to furnish relevant documents, so as to enable the legal forum to verify truth and accuracy of transaction value as claimed by the petitioner.
However, the submission made by the petitioner was not made by the petitioner was not found sustainable. With a view to ascertain the veracity of arguments of the advocated, an independent market survey report was undertaken and the factual position has transpired, which revealed:
The customs value of flood light was initially determined in 2012 at $1.30/kg and was revised in the year 2014 after a gap of two years. The increase in price is obviously depictive of the impact of prevailing market values and change over the years, which has not been negated by the petitioner.
The advocate has not been able to furnish the details of expenses incurred in the manufacture of imported goods. As such the contention made by him in this regard is not considerable for want of submission of relevant documents.
As per verification of market survey, the goods ‘flood light of china origin, are available at Rs525 – 2400 per piece of 150 Watts (equal to $1.72/kg minimum) & Rs3300 – 7000 per pc of 400 Watts (equal to $4/kg minimum). The variation in market prices is attributable towards product quality, guarantee and accessories covering sales/marketing incentives, but it is obviously clear that the findings of enquiry are reflective of higher price indication.
Consideration of minimum market price as worked out on the basis of fresh survey is relatively in conformity with the prices covered in the ruling and appears to be realistic and justified.
The DG in the order said that the valuation ruling, convincing reasoning had been given to justify the issuance of the same, which was based upon scrutiny of data and findings in terms of Section 25(7) of the Customs Act, 1969, as referred above.
The working drawn under the aforesaid provision of law seems to have been fairly substantiated in the reply objections/comments give by the customs authorities. The petitioner has since not been able to demonstrate that the incidence of actual duty and taxes was passed on to the consumer, it renders rejection of revision petition in the terms of section 19A of the Customs Act, 1969.
The transaction value has been defined under Section 25(1) of the Customs Act, 1969 as the price actually paid or payable for the goods when sold for export to Pakistan. As per Article 17 of the WTO Valuation Agreement read with Section 25 of the Customs Act, 1969 the customs administration has got a right to satisfy themselves as to the truth or accuracy of any statement, document or declaration presented for customs valuation purpose. Thus in the case, the petitioner failed to discharge onus under the law.
“In the light of findings and keeping in view the legal infirmities in the revision petition, the same is not maintainable and is accordingly rejected,” the director general remarked.