Challenge to Customs Valuation

TO THE DIRECTOR GENERAL, CUSTOMS VALUATION, ISLAMABAD / provincial_dg_location

APPLICATION CHALLENGING CUSTOMS VALUATION OF IMPORTED GOODS

Applicant/Importer: applicant_name, NTN No. ntn_number Address: applicant_address Contact: applicant_phone Import Transaction: Bill of Entry: bill_of_entry_number Date: import_date Port: port_of_entry Challan No.: challan_number

The applicant respectfully submits this application challenging the valuation of imported goods determined by the Customs authorities for duty assessment under Section 25 of the Customs Act 1969.

The applicant imported cargo_description declared at declared_value per unit. Customs assessed the valuation at assessed_value per unit, resulting in duty increase of valuation_difference.

Valuation Methodology Applied: The Customs authority applied the valuation_method method under Section 25 Customs Act 1969. However, the valuation is manifestly incorrect and exceeds fair market value by percentage_excess.

Supporting Comparative Evidence: (1) Transaction value of identical goods imported on comparable_date_1 was comparable_value_1; (2) Similar goods imported by comparable_importer on comparable_date_2 were valued at comparable_value_2; (3) International reference price from international_source dated reference_date shows value at international_value.

Commercial Practice: The declared value of declared_value per unit reflects the actual price paid to the supplier and is in line with prevailing market rates. Attached hereto are invoices from three other suppliers showing identical or similar pricing.

The customs authority has assessed the imported goods at an inflated valuation that is manifestly at variance with comparable transactions and international market values. This assessment violates Section 25 of the Customs Act 1969, which prescribes a sequential methodology for valuation determination. IMPUGNED VALUATION: Bill of Entry: bill_of_entry_number Date of Import: import_date Port of Entry: port_of_entry Cargo Description: cargo_description Declared Value: declared_value per unit Assessed Value: assessed_value per unit Excess Assessment: percentage_excess% above declared value ERROR IN VALUATION METHOD: The authority applied valuation_method incorrectly, failing to consider comparable transaction evidence at each sequential step as mandated by Section 25. COMPARABLE TRANSACTION EVIDENCE: 1. Comparable Transaction 1: Dated comparable_date_1, similar goods valued at comparable_value_1 per unit by an independent importer. 2. Comparable Transaction 2: Dated comparable_date_2, comparable goods imported by comparable_importer and valued at comparable_value_2 per unit, filed with Customs on the same date. 3. International Reference: international_source published on reference_date establishes an international reference price of international_value per unit for identical goods on the open market. APPLICANT'S PROPOSED VALUATION: Taking into account the comparable transaction method prescribed by Section 25(1), the applicant proposes a corrected valuation of applicant_proposed_value per unit, which aligns with market evidence and the sequential methodology. EXCESS DUTY SOUGHT AS REFUND: excess_duty_amount has been paid as excess duty due to this unlawful assessment and is sought to be refunded.

The customs authority has assessed the imported goods at an inflated valuation that is manifestly at variance with comparable transactions and international market values. This assessment violates Section 25 of the Customs Act 1969, which prescribes a sequential methodology for valuation determination. IMPUGNED VALUATION: Bill of Entry: bill_of_entry_number Date of Import: import_date Port of Entry: port_of_entry Cargo Description: cargo_description Declared Value: declared_value per unit Assessed Value: assessed_value per unit Excess Assessment: percentage_excess% above declared value ERROR IN VALUATION METHOD: The authority applied valuation_method incorrectly, failing to consider comparable transaction evidence at each sequential step as mandated by Section 25. COMPARABLE TRANSACTION EVIDENCE: 1. Comparable Transaction 1: Dated comparable_date_1, similar goods valued at comparable_value_1 per unit by an independent importer. 2. Comparable Transaction 2: Dated comparable_date_2, comparable goods imported by comparable_importer and valued at comparable_value_2 per unit, filed with Customs on the same date. 3. International Reference: international_source published on reference_date establishes an international reference price of international_value per unit for identical goods on the open market. APPLICANT'S PROPOSED VALUATION: Taking into account the comparable transaction method prescribed by Section 25(1), the applicant proposes a corrected valuation of applicant_proposed_value per unit, which aligns with market evidence and the sequential methodology. EXCESS DUTY SOUGHT AS REFUND: excess_duty_amount has been paid as excess duty due to this unlawful assessment and is sought to be refunded.

Section 25 Customs Act 1969 provides sequential valuation methods. The transaction value method should apply where the goods are freely supplied at sale price in accordance with supply terms. The applicant's declared value meets this test.

IN THE RESULT, the applicant humbly requests that the Director General, Customs Valuation, be pleased to: 1. Revise the assessed valuation from assessed_value to applicant_proposed_value per unit; 2. Find that the transaction value method applies and validate the declared value; 3. Direct refund of excess duty paid as a result of incorrect valuation, amounting to PKR excess_duty_amount; 4. Add statutory interest on the refund amount; 5. Amend the Customs records accordingly. And for such other relief as may be deemed appropriate.

applicant_counsel_name Advocate/Representative for Applicant Enrolled on Roll No. advocate_roll_no Date: filing_date