KARACHI: Director General of Customs Valuation Syed Tanveer Ahmed has issued Order-in-Revision 220/2016 rejecting petition of M/s Trade International praying to quash the values determined vide Valuation Ruling No.826/2016.

M/s Trade International submitted that they had imported hundreds of tons of paper/paper board on actual transactional value, the price actually paid for the goods when sold for export to Pakistan. All the consignments were however cleared in terms of Valuation Ruling No.623/2013, which is now superseded by Valuation Ruling No.826/2016.

Imported submitted the Director issued the impugned Ruling without properly appreciating the current evidences produced before him. The importer is aggrieved by the Value of China origin Coated Art Card which has been fixed at $720/PMT as against actual Transaction Value of $660/PMT  and is also aggrieved by the Value of Japan origin Coated Art Paper which has been un-lawfully determined at $740/PMT as against actual/true Transaction Value of $670/PMT.

The Ruling further depicts unfair application of relevant law empowering the Director to determine Value of imported items. Therefore, the impugned ruling is highly defective, discriminatory, illegal and ultra vires of the Customs Act. 1969.

Director Valuation stated that in the previous valuation ruling the value of Coated Art Card of China origin was $760/MT which was reduced to $720/MT, similarly the value of Coated Art Card Japan origin was $770/MT reduced to $740/MT in the existing valuation ruling. Paper Merchants Association also agreed during the meeting held in the department.

After detailed deliberation the Directorate General noted M/s Trade International, Lahore import documents reveals that it is a related party transaction. Import made by the petitioner being indenter and percentage of selling commission involved is a part of value which was not declared and added in the transaction. The prayer of the importer for the acceptance of transaction value after concealing the facts indicate that the petitioner has not come with clean hands. In view of above, the Director General rejected the revision application.