KARACHI: Directorate-General Customs Valuation Director Shafiq Ahmad Latki has revised customs values of frequency interverts through Valuation Ruling No. 1439/2019.
Earlier, customs values of frequency interverters were determined through Valuation Ruling No. 973/2016 dated 22.11.2016. A number of representations were received in the Directorate-General that frequency inverters were being declared with various technical and fabricated names so as to avoid application of the valuation ruling.
Moreover, the valuation rulings, being three years old and the values of subject goods in international market have shown varying trend, required re-determination. Keeping in view of the above facts, an exercise was initiated to re-determine the customs values of the subject goods under Section 25-A of the Customs Act, 1969.
Meetings with stakeholders were convened on 31.10.2019, 12.22.2019 and 19.11.2019 which was attended by different stakeholders and importers. The participants were requested to submit following documents before or during the course of meeting so that customs values could be determined:-
- Invoices of imports during last three months showing customs values.
- Websites, names and e-mail addresses of known foreign manufacturers of the item in question through which the actual value can be ascertained.
- Copies of contracts/LCs opened during the last three months showing the value of item in question.
- Copies of sales tax invoices issued during the last four months showing the difference in price (excluding duty and taxes) to substantiate their contentions.
The representatives of M/s M.D. Enterprises, M/s Dominar Engineering, M/s. ABB Power and Automation Private Limited, M/s Ameerjee Villajee & Sons explained that variable frequency drive (VFD) frequency converter is device which is used to control the speed of an electrical machinery by varing the frequency and voltage apply to the machine in a certain proportion.
Customs valuation methods given in Section 25 of the Customs Act, 1969 were applied in sequential order to address the valuation issue at hand.
Transaction value method under Sub-Section (I) of Section 25- of the act ibid was found inapplicable because requisite information under the law was not available.
