Natural product classification under excise law: shikai powder held outside tariff coverage and levy quashed

Shikai powder was treated as a natural product not covered by the relevant tariff entries or the residuary description for excisable commodities, so it could not be classified as an excisable good merely through administrative classification. The note also states that a coordinate bench decision of the same High Court remained binding unless overruled by a higher court or larger bench, and that the pendency of an appeal did not make that precedent non-existent. On that basis, the contrary view of another High Court was not treated as displacing the binding precedent, and the excise classification and levy were quashed.

---

---

Issues: Whether shikai powder was classifiable as an excisable product and liable to central excise duty.

Analysis: The Court followed the earlier decision of the same High Court holding that seeakkai or shikai is a natural product and does not fall within the relevant tariff entries or the residuary description used for excisable commodities. It held that the prior single-judge decision remained binding, and that the pendency of an appeal did not render that ruling non-existent. The contrary view of another High Court was not treated as displacing the binding precedent of this Court.

Conclusion: Shikai powder was held not to be an excisable good, and the impugned classification order was set aside in favour of the petitioner.

Final Conclusion: The writ petition succeeded and the excise classification and levy in respect of shikai powder were quashed.

Ratio Decidendi: A coordinate bench decision remains binding unless overruled by a higher court or a larger bench, and a natural product not falling within the tariff entries cannot be treated as an excisable commodity merely by administrative classification.

---