KARACHI: Director General Customs Valuation Syed Tanveer Ahmed has issued Order in Revision No 266/2016 under section 25-D of the Customs Act, 1969 against Valuation Ruling No 891/2016 dated 27-07-2016.
According to the details, the revision petition was filed by M/s. Colgate Palmolive (Private) Limited under section 25-D of the Customs Act, 1969 against customs value determined vide Valuation Ruling No.891/2016 dated 27-07-2016 issued under Section 25-A of the Customs Act, 1969.
The applicant Colgate-Palmolive Limited, is a company incorporated in Pakistan under the Companies Ordinance 1984 and engaged in the business of manufacturing and sale of consumer products and is also a regular importer of various raw materials/chemicals including “Sodium Sulphate Anhydrous” for the manufacturing of the its products.
The value of Sodium Sulphate Anhydrous in the international market is US$ 0.075/- per kg. The applicant in its routine business imports Sodium Sulphate Anhydrous from China on a regular basis on the price ranging from US$ 0.075 to US$ 0.078 per kg. This is the transaction value between the applicant and the suppliers from the international market. However, in order to avoid delays and confrontations with the customs department, the applicant declares the price according to the valuation ruling in the Goods Declaration.
The prices of Sodium Sulphate Anhydrous were determined previously in terms of Section 25A of the Customs Act, 1969 vide Valuation Ruling No.802/2016 dated 22-1-2016 (a) USD 0.115/kg on the imports of China and Taiwan which were on the very higher side in relevance to the prevailing international prices. That in this context the applicant and other importers made several representations to the valuation department and gave their valuable assistance.
However, abruptly, the very next day, i.e. on 27.07.2016, the impugned ruling was issued fixing the values for the said product i.e. Sodium Sulphate Anhydrous from China and Taiwan a US$ 0.11/kg without adhering to the principles laid down in valuation cases decided by the superior courts as well as section 25 of the Customs Act. This has prejudiced the applicant and others who are the importers of the said product as the values determined by the respondent vide the said valuation ruling without considering, transactional value of the applicant under ction 25 (1) of the Customs Act 1969, and determined the values by resorting directly to section 25(7) & 25 (9) which is unlawful, illegal and wholly without jurisdiction.
The Director General Customs Valuation Syed Tanvir Ahmed stated in his order that, the case record and written as well as verbal submission of the petitioner’s were examined in detail. Mrs Naveen defence counsel appeared on behalf of the petitioner and stated that the prices have been determined on higher side whereas import prices of the subject item are available on lesser side on international Website. Zauba data shows almost US$ 90 to 100/MT. Similarly Chinese websites values of the subject item Sodium Sulphate Anhydrous of China origin are again available on lower side ranging from US$ 90 to US$ 100/MT instead of determined custom values. Keeping in view of the above facts I have inferred that the contention of the imported is valid and customs values are reduced from USS 110/matric ton to US$ 100/ matric ton Sodium Sulphate Anhydrous of China origin.