KARACHI: Customs Valuation Director General Samaira Nazir Khan has rejected a review petition for amendment in Valuation Ruling 632/2014 of wire rope.
The DG rejected the petition through order under Section 25-D of the Customs Act, 1969. This revision petition was filed under Section 25-D of the Customs Act, 1969 against customs value determined vide Valuation Ruling 632/2014 dated January 02, 2014.
The petitioner requested that “value determined through Valuation Ruling 632/2014 may please be revised and determined keeping in view the elements of thickness of wire rope, manufacturing process involved, nature of utilisation of wire rope and physical strength of wire rope”, adding, “We are confident our request will be considered and immediate appropriate action will be taken accordingly.”
Muhammad Imran, proprietor of Umar Usman and Sons, appeared for hearing and submitted a written statement, contending that the impugned item is valued on higher side and valuation of product galvanised steel wire rope under PCT 7312.1010, 7312.1920 may be fixed on the LME price basis.
During the course of the hearing, the petitioner also committed to providing evidence in support of his contention but could not furnish any substantial documentary evidence.
The department put forth valid arguments that the prices of steel wire rope do not exist in LME, hence the question of linking the price of wire rope with that of LME does not arise.
Further that the element of thickness and its utilisation is not worth considering in the presence of unit of measurement in the Pakistan Customs Tariff which is in kilogramme (kg). Both these arguments were examined and it was concluded that in the absence of any published price of the impugned item in any international reliable publication like LME, the same could not be linked with it and the impugned valuation ruling had also been issued as per unit i.e. kilogramme.
Moreover, the plea taken by the respondent before the Honourable Lahore High Court, Multan Bench, that their revision petition is pending before the Customs Valuation director general is also not based on facts, as the same was responded to by the directorate general vide office letter number Misc/13/2010-VIA/4494 dated 11-03-2014, duly informing them that their review petition was barred by time.
Customs Valuation Director General Samaira Nazir Khan further said in her order that in the light of reasons given above, and keeping in view of legal infirmities in the revision petition, the same was not maintainable and accordingly rejected.
