2025 (12) TMI 1159

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....024 obtained by the petitioner. The said authorization granted in favour of the petitioner permits import of wheat flour without payment of customs duty. However, the respondents under the impugned seizure notice has held that the aforesaid authorization will not apply to the case of the petitioner since the product involved is "vital wheat gluten" and not "wheat flour" for which duty free import authorization was obtained by the petitioner. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner drew the attention of this Court to the following authorities in support of his contentions that "vital wheat gluten" and "wheat flour" are one and the same, for the purpose of classification of goods under the Customs Tariff Act and for obtaining customs dut....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....t the public notice No.41/2015-2020 dated 02.11.2016 issued by the Government of India, Ministry of Commerce and Industry, Department of Commerce, Directorate General of Foreign Trade has no applicability to the goods imported by the petitioner since the same has been suspended on 26.08.2025 through public notice No.20/2025-26. The suspension of Standard Input Output Norms (SIONs), which applies to the goods imported by the petitioner has also been placed on record by the learned counsel for the petitioner. Therefore, once again, the learned counsel for the petitioner would reiterate that the impugned seizure notice has been issued by total non application of mind to the fact that the Ministry has suspended the Standard Input Output Norms (....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that since the law is well settled, that "vital wheat gluten" and "wheat flour" are one and the same, in view of the authorities relied upon by him, which has been referred to supra, there is no necessity for this Court to direct the petitioner to participate in the hearings pursuant to the impugned seizure notice issued by the respondents to the petitioner. 9. Till date, counter has not been filed by the respondents. The learned Senior Panel Counsel appearing for the respondents seeks time to file counter. However, as seen from the earlier proceedings of this Court, this writ petition is listed for hearing before this Court for the fourth time. More than two weeks have elapsed since the w....