Commissioner of Customs Vs. Sunsip Ltd.

1. this appeal seeks to challenge the decision of the commissioner (appeals) holding that the value of the citric acid declared by the importer is to be accepted and there was no basis for its endorsement in the order of the asstt. collector impugned before him.2. the collector (appeals) found that while an invoice had been cited of another import of citric acid on the basis of which it was proposed to increase the value of the citric acid under consideration, the details of that importation had not been furnished.3. the appeal seeks to question this on the ground that both the importations were made more or less at the same time, is irrelevant. it is not as necessary that the importation is about same time, but it is also necessary that the goods with which the goods under assessment are sought to be compared must be identical or similar, if the rule 5 and 6 of the valuation rules are applied. in the absence of any details as to the country of origin or the importation, the quantity, such comparison would not be possible. the fact that the supplier of both the consignment was the same person (at hong kong) is no answer. this supplier may be supplying the goods of numerous manufacturers from different country. the commissioner (appeals) has not said (as is attributed in the appeal) that more than one of contemporaneous import is necessary. what he has said is that there must be sufficient details of the importation.