TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (6) TMI 512
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rted goods by labelling the same as roasted areca nuts. Since the goods were not released to the respective petitioner in spite of several requests in that regard, these Writ Petitions were filed. Each Writ Petition is for a mandamus directing the respondents to release the goods under the respective bills of entry subject to payment of applicable taxes. 3. When these Writ Petitions were listed for hearing on 06.02.2024, learned senior counsel and learned counsel for the respective petitioner relied upon reports of the Central Revenue Control Laboratory, Chennai (CRCL Chennai) and the Food Safety and Standards Authority of India (FSSAI) to contend that the goods qualify as roasted areca nuts, whereas the respondents relied on reports of the Central Revenue Control Laboratory, Delhi (CRCL Delhi) and the Arecanut Research and Development Foundation (ARDF) to contend that the goods are dried areca nuts and not roasted areca nuts. 4. In those circumstances, I directed the FSSAI to undertake testing of samples from each consignment to ascertain whether the samples satisfy all relevant parameters of roasted arecanuts and to determine whether such arecanuts are fit for human consumption....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....it petitions, the petitioners are inviting a decision on a classification dispute. Under Section 130 of the Customs Act, even an appeal does not lie in respect of the rate of duty or the value of goods. Consequently, these Writ Petitions should not be entertained. (v) Since the classification and release of goods, including provisional release, fall within the exclusive jurisdiction of the customs authorities, this Court should not perform the functions of such authority or direct that such authority should exercise discretion in a particular manner. On this issue, learned senior standing counsel relied on the judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Navin Chemicals Mfg. & Trading Co. Ltd. v. Collector of Customs, 1993 (68) E.L.T.3(S.C.) and Steel Authority of India Ltd. v. Commissioner, Central Excise and Customs, (2022) 22 GSTR-OL 95. (vi) The FSSAI report cannot be relied upon with regard to classification since such authority is only concerned with food safety. (vii) Regulation 2.3.55 of the Food Safety and Standards (Food Products Standards and Food Additives) Regulations, 2011 does not deal with roasted areca nut. Therefore, such report may only be relied upon to d....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....fy under CTH 08 02 80 would fall foul of the settled rule of construction that specific entry would prevail over general entry. (c) HSN explanatory notes is normally a safe guide in determining classification under CTH. Roasted areca/betel nut having been mentioned in CTH 2008 19 20 under HSN, the impugned Ruling is in consonance with HSN classification. (d) When there is a specific entry covering a product/commodity, the test of common parlance is irrelevant in determining classification. 17. For all above reasons, we are not inclined to interfere with the findings of the Advance Rulings Authority, which stands affirmed." 10. As on date, the above judgment of the Division Bench of this Court holds the field. As a corollary, the position today is that roasted areca nuts are liable to be classified under CTH 2008 19 20 and not under CTH 08 02 80. Therefore, for purposes of deciding these cases, it is unnecessary to examine the question of classification, which stands resolved. Nonetheless, it is necessary to consider whether the relevant consignments forming the subject matter of these writ petitions contain roasted areca nuts. 11. As discussed earlier, in view of conflictin....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e conforms to standards specified in Regulation 2.3.55 of the the Food Safety and Standards (Food Products Standards and Food Additives) Regulations, 2011 and Regulations 2.1.1, 2.2.1, 2.3.1 and 2.5.1 of the Food Safety and Standards (Contaminants, Toxins and Residues) Regulations, 2011. 14. It should be noticed that the FSSAI was directed to test samples on all relevant parameters to determine whether the samples are roasted areca nuts, and to determine whether such areca nuts are fit for human consumption. Both the questions were answered in the affirmative by the FSSAI. 15. The contention of Mr.V.Sundareswaran that the decision as to whether the goods should be released, provisionally or otherwise, falls within the exclusive jurisdiction of the respondents should be examined against this background. 16. In each writ petition, the respective petitioner has placed copies of communications and representations seeking release of the goods. Such requests and representations were made even before the goods were subject to seizure. As on date, those representations have not been responded to by the respondents. While the adjudication officer is empowered to provisionally release goo....