In Brief
The Supreme Court allowed three civil appeals challenging customs authorities' revaluation of imported decorative lighting consignments. The appellant, Anil Kumar Anand (and M/s. Diyas Mantra Lighting and its directors), imported goods under brand names 'Diyas' and 'mAntra' from the UK, China, and Spain. The customs authority revalued the goods under Rules 7 and 9 of the Customs Valuation Rules, imposing differential duty and penalties. The Court held that the authority fundamentally erred by bypassing the mandatory sequential application of Rules 3 to 5 (which cover identical and similar goods from transaction comparables) and jumping directly to Rules 7 and 9 (deductive and residual methods). Since identical goods were available from unrelated suppliers at or about the same time, Rules 3 to 5 had to be applied first. The Court set aside the impugned orders and remitted the matter for fresh determination following the correct sequential methodology."
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.