VIN VALUATION: Appeal Court Rules in favour of SEREC Against Nigeria Customs Service
By Mcanthony Onuoha
In a landmark judgement, the Court of Appeal, Lagos Judicial Division, on Wednesday, 13 of April 2026, ruled in favour of Sea Empowerment Research Center against the Nigeria Customs Service on Vehicle Identification Number (VIN) Valuation policy.
In the appeal filed by Sea Empowerment Research Centre/GTE & Anor against the Nigeria Customs Service, No. CA/LAG/CV/1070/2022, delivered on 13 April 2026, the Court of Appeal, Lagos Judicial Division, granted the prayer of Sea Empowerment Research Center/GTE &Anor setting aside the judgment of the Federal High Court, Lagos, which had earlier dismissed the appellants’ suit challenging the legality of the Nigeria Customs Service’s Vehicle Identification Number (VIN) Valuation Policy.
The appellants contended that the VIN Valuation Policy unlawfully imposed customs duties based on automated benchmark values generated through artificial intelligence and online trade data, rather than on the actual transaction value of imported vehicles as evidenced by commercial invoices. They argued that the practice contravene Section 45 of the Customs and Excise Management Act (CEMA), the First Schedule to CEMA, and applicable international trade valuation principles under the GATT framework.
The respondent defended the policy as a lawful mechanism designed to eliminate human interference, curb fraud, and improve efficiency in customs valuation. It maintained that CEMA did not prescribe transaction value as the exclusive basis for valuation and that the Customs authority possessed statutory discretion to determine import duty valuation methods.
In the lead judgment delivered by Justice Yargata Byenchit Nimpar, the Court of Appeal held that the trial court erred in dismissing the appellants’ claims for lack of credible evidence. The appellate court found that the respondent’s own counter-affidavit substantially admitted that the VIN valuation system automatically generated benchmark values without first considering the importer’s declared transaction value.
The court further held that the Federal High Court breached the appellants’ constitutional right to fair hearing by raising, suo motu, the issue of non-exhaustion of internal remedies under CEMA without inviting the parties to address the issue before relying on it in its decision.
On the substantive issue, the Court of Appeal held that customs valuation under Section 45 of CEMA must first consider the transaction value of imported goods before any alternative valuation mechanism may be adopted. The court concluded that any customs duty regime that disregards the actual commercial value of imported goods in favour of predetermined benchmark figures is inconsistent with the governing statutory framework.
Accordingly, the appeal was allowed, the judgment of the Federal High Court was set aside, and the Court of Appeal granted reliefs in favour of the appellants, affirming that the VIN Valuation Policy must accommodate and consider the actual transaction value declared by importers.
