TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (6) TMI 185
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ore the Customs Authority for Advance Rulings, New Delhi (CAAR, in short) for seeking advance ruling. The complete application was received in the Secretariat of the CAAR, New Delhi on 30.01.2026 along with their enclosures in terms of Section 28H(1) of the Customs Act, 1962 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act'). The IEC of the applicant is 1415000026. The applicant proposed to import roasted arecanut/betel nut and requested for advance ruling for on the following questions of law and fact: a. Whether "roasted betel nut /areca nut" (hereinafter referred to as 'subject product') obtained by subjecting whole areca nuts to roasting by heat treatment without addition of any ingredients, is classifiable under Chapter 08....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ring agents, preservatives, chemicals, or any other additives are added before, during, or after roasting. 2.3 According to the applicant, roasting process is carried out solely for reduction of moisture content, enhancement of shelf life, prevention of fungal infestation, during safe storage and transportation. It is contended that the roasting process does not amount to manufacture, does not create a new commercially distinct commodity, and does not alter the end-use, essential character, market identity, or consumer perception of the product. Even after roasting, the product continues to be commercially known, bought, sold, and consumed as betel nut/areca nut in common trade parlance. 2.4 The applicant relies upon the provisions of....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ainty through the advance ruling mechanism in order to avoid ambiguity, disputes, misclassification, and future litigation. It is also affirmed that no proceedings on the same issue are pending before any Customs Authority, Appellate Authority, Tribunal, or Court of Law. 2.8 In conclusion, the applicant prays for an advance ruling confirming that roasted betel nut/areca nut, subjected merely to minimal roasting or heat treatment without addition of any ingredients or change in essential character, remains classifiable as areca nut/betel nut under Heading 0802 of Chapter 8 of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975. 3. Additional submission by the applicant 3.1 Upon a careful scrutiny of the application, it was observed that the issue arising ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....hable on facts. In the said matter, the issue before the Hon'ble Court pertained to a separate factual matrix and interpretation based upon materials placed in that specific proceeding. The present Applicant seeks independent determination based on: Specific manufacturing process; Degree of roasting; Change in product characteristics; Commercial identity; Laboratory standards; End-use pattern; Trade parlance test; Import documentation and technical specifications. Therefore, the present matter requires independent examination." 4. Personal hearing: Personal hearing in the said application was held on date 26.05.2026, wherein authorized representative, Mr. Pankaj Roy attended the same virtually a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....a) already pending in the applicant's case before any officer of customs, the Appellate Tribunal or any Court, (b) the same as in a matter already decided by the Appellate Tribunal or any Court. 5.3. From the above, I find that Section 28-I (2) of the Customs Act, 1962 governs the admissibility of applications before the Custom Authority for Advance Rulings (CAAR). The first proviso to sub- section (2) stipulates that the Authority shall not allow the application where the question raised in the application is : (a) already pending in the applicant's case before any officer of customs, the Appellate Tribunal or any Court; or (b) the same as in a matter already decided by the Appellate Tribunal or any Co....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ling mechanism. Clause (b) therefore operates as a statutory reinforcement of judicial discipline, making it explicit that once a question has been conclusively determined by the Tribunal or Courts, the Authority cannot re-adjudicate the same issue at the behest of another party. 5.6. In the instant case, I observed that the question raised in the present application is squarely covered by the judgment of the Hon'ble Madras High Court in the case of M/s Shahnaz International Pvt. Ltd. [2023 (386) E.L.T. 214 (Mad.)], wherein the issue relating to the classification of Roasted Areca Nuts has already been examined and decided. 5.7. Further, I observe that the questions raised in the application regarding whether the process of roasti....