KARACHI: Director General Customs Valuation Syed Tanveer Ahmed issues Order in Revision No.294 /2017 under section 25-D of the Customs Act, 1969 against Valuation Ruling No.936/2016 dated 23-09-2016; the revision petition was filed by M/s Forte Pakistan Pvt. Ltd.
According to details, the applicant stated that impugned valuation ruling has been framed in clear disregard to the legal dictates on various customs laws and dis-obedience to the sequential methods as provided under the law. No documentary evidences have been provided to the stakeholder manufacturer in support of the contention raised therein-, neither any calculation of methods.
Director General Customs Valuation in his order stated that hearing in the case was fixed on 22-11-2016. M/s Forte Pakistan (Pvt) Ltd., the manufacturer of Rubber Foam Insulation in Pakistan filed revision petition against the Valuation Ruling No.936/2016, dated 23-09-2016 and stated that the impugned Valuation Ruling was issued in their absence and issued under-valued arbitrarily in absence of lawful justification for undue benefit to the commercial importers.
suggested that values of Rubber Foam Pipe should be determined around US$ 7.00/kg to US$8.00/kg instead of US$ 3.15/kg to US$ 4.15/kg notified in the impugned Valuation Ruling No.936/2016, dated 23-09-2016. M/s Qaiser Mukhtar Brothers also submitted a letter dated 07-11-2016 for inclusion of Turkey by name in the impugned Valuation Ruling. However, he has also not filed review petition under Section 25-D of the Customs Act, 1969. The aforesaid letter was also submitted on 07-11-2016 i.e. after 46 days even if treated a review petition.
I have gone through the record of the case, written and verbal submissions by the petitioners and respondent department. I have inferred that customs values have been determined in proper manner after conducting market enquiry and analyzing the import data and all other relevant information. As regards the inclusion of Turkey by name in the impugned Valuation Ruling, the Director of Customs Valuation is directed to consider this while issuing fresh Valuation Ruling after expiry of 90 days period. Therefore, Valuation Ruling No.936/2016, dated 2309-2016 is, hereby, maintained and revision petition is rejected.
