TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (7) TMI 1470
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....goods are not retail packs and would not be classifiable under CTH 2309 1000 as "Dog and cat food, put up for retail sale." 3. Respondent No.3 submitted a Reply dated 28th March 2025 in response to the said Advance Ruling Application and contended that the said goods are retail packs and the correct classification would be under CTH 2309 1000 as "Dog and cat food, put up for retail sale." 4. The Appellant also filed its Rejoinder dated 10th June 2025 rebutting the contents of the Reply and submitted that the said goods are in the nature of wholesale packages, and, therefore, the same are not classifiable under CTH 2309 1000. 5. By an Order dated 4th July 2025, the CAAR held that the imported nutritionally balanced dog and cat feed in 20kg. bags is a retail pack and classifiable under CTH 2309 1000 as "Dog or cat food, put up for retail sale," attracting Basic Customs Duty at the rate of 20%. Being aggrieved by the said Order of the CAAR, the Appellant has filed the present Appeal. QUESTIONS OF LAW 6. According to the Appellant, the following questions of law arise for consideration and determination of this Court: "a) Whether on the facts and circumstances of t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....owing its own advance ruling passed in the case of Royal Canin [Ruling No. CAAR/Mum/ARC/35/2024 dated 05.03.2024] wherein on identical facts and circumstances, it was held that the imported pet foods in bulk bags weighing 15 kg to 700 kg are not for retail sale and would not be classifiable under CTH 23091000? h) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and under the law, the Jurisdictional Customs Commissionerate can take a diagonally opposite stand as taken in the case of Royal Canin (supra) where the Respondents did not object the classification of identical products under CTH 2309 90 90, and now suggesting that the subject goods merit classification under CTH 23091000? i) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and under the law, the subject goods rightly merit classification under CTH 23099010 'Compounded animal feed' attracting Basic Customs Duty @15%?" SUBMISSIONS OF THE PARTIES 7. Mr. Sandeep Sachdeva, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Appellant, made submissions challenging the said Order dated 4th July 2025. Mr. Sachdeva submitted that the Appellant, in the course of its business, imports nutritionally balanced dog....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....even as per the HSN Explanatory Notes the term 'Retail Sale' does not include goods which are repacked further. He submitted that since, in the present case, the imported bulk packages are made subject to further repacking, the said imported bulk packages cannot be said to be retail packs as the sale of such packages by the Appellant cannot be said to be a retail sale in the light of the HSN Explanatory Notes. 14. Mr. Sachdeva submitted that the Customs Tariff read with the HSN Explanatory Notes contains several tariff entries wherein the legislature has consciously used expressions such as "put up for retail sale" or "whether or not put up for retail sale". Mr. Sachdeva submitted that the use of such expressions across numerous Tariff headings, including HSN Explanatory Notes, clearly demonstrates that the manner of packing, presentation and marketability of the goods assumes significance for classification purposes. If the intention of the legislature is to classify the goods solely on the basis of their nature or end-use, there was no necessity to incorporate such expressions in the tariff. 15. Mr. Sachdeva referred to various tariff entries in the Customs Tariff and corre....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ch is directly contrary to the view adopted by it in Royal Canin (Supra). While in Royal Canin (Supra), the CAAR accepted that pet food imported in bulk packs and subjected to repacking after importation could not be regarded as goods "put up for retail sale", in the present case, the very same expression has been interpreted in a completely opposite manner to hold that the subject goods merit classification under CTH 2309 1000. 21. Mr. Sachdeva submitted that although an Advance Ruling is binding only upon the Applicant who sought the ruling and the jurisdictional customs authorities concerned in such proceedings, the existence of an earlier ruling rendered by the very same authority on an identical issue and substantially similar facts cannot be completely ignored while deciding a subsequent application. Mr. Sachdeva submitted that in the present case, the issue involved, whether pet food imported in bulk packs and repacked after importation can be regarded as goods "put up for retail sale", had already been examined by the CAAR in Royal Canin (Supra). Despite the same, the CAAR has adopted a different interpretation of the very same tariff and has arrived at a contrary conclu....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Appellant now seeks reclassification under CTH 2309 9010, arguing that the 20kg. bulk packages, lacking MRP and other retail declarations, do not satisfy the requirement of being "put up for retail sale" and instead qualify as "compounded animal feed". The relevant entries in the Custom Tariff read as under: Tariff Item Description of goods Unit Rate of duty Std. Prefnl.Areas (1) - (2) (3) (4) (5) 2309 - Preparations of a kind used in animal feeding - - - 2309 1000 - Dog or cat food, put up for retail sale kg. [20%] - 2309 90 - Other : - - - 2309 9010 - Compounded animal feed kg. [15%] - 28. In support of its submissions, the Appellant relies on the HSN Explanatory Notes to Heading 2309, the Legal Metrology (Packaged Commodities) Rules, 2011, particularly Rule 2(k) and Rule 6(1), and a ruling by the the CAAR in the case of Royal Canin (Supra). It is the case of the Appellant that the absence of consumer declarations such as MRP and the repackaging of the goods into smaller units post-import indicate that the product does no....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....pounded animal feed). 33. The Appellant has shown to the Court the product labels on the 20kg. pack, which discloses detailed consumer-facing information such as composition, analytical constituents, feeding guidelines, instructions for use, batch number, expiry date, and the names and addresses of the manufacturer and importer. The said product label reads as under: PUPPY SMALL & MEDIUM BREED 28/18 NET QTY 20KG - BULK PACKAGING Composition: Dehydrated chicken protein, maize, white rice, peas, chicken fat, hydrolyzed chicken protein, dried beet pulp, flax seed, minerals, salmon oil, dried brewer's yeast, dried chicory (a natural source of FOS and inulin), MOS & beta glucans, coconut oil, dried turmeric, dried basil, dried ginger. Analytical constituents Analytical constituents Crude Protein 28% Additives (Per kg) Crude Fat 18% Vitamin A 15.0000 IU Crude Fibre 3.5% Max Vitamin D3 1.500 IU Inorganic Matter 7.0% Max Vitamin E 100 mg Moisture 9.0% Trace Elements Calcium 1.0% Iron 50.0mg Phosphorous 0.8% Copper 10.0mg Zinc 60.0mg ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t. Therefore, where the product is packaged in a form that includes these details, then regardless of whether MRP is printed, the objective indicators of retail packaging are clearly present 38. Furthermore, the Appellant's own submission reveals that the goods are fully formulated dry pet food intended for direct feeding to dogs and cats without any requirement for further processing. This strongly suggests that the product, even in 20kg. packs, is retail-ready and not a raw or intermediate input. In our view, it is incorrect to suggest that only goods bearing an MRP label or those in small-sized packs can be regarded as "put up for retail sale." 39. The Legal Metrology (Packaged Commodities) Rules, 2011, under Rule 2(k) and Rule 6(1), define and prescribe the characteristics of retail packages, and any package not exceeding 25 kg is presumed to be for retail sale, unless otherwise proven. The Appellant has not produced any statutory exemption or factual evidence showing that the 20kg packs are legally precluded from being sold to consumers in the same form. 40. Moreover, contextual intent, such as whether the goods are meant for direct consumer use, is a relevant and per....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t from this status, especially as the packs fall below the 25 kg exemption threshold under Rule 3(a) of the Legal Metrology (Packaged Commodities) Rules, 2011, and comply with Rule 6(1) labelling requirements. 45. Therefore, we find that the Appellant's 20kg. packs meet both legal and factual criteria for classification under CTH 2309 1000. They are complete, consumer-ready pet food bearing detailed declarations, and fall within the statutory scope of "put up for retail sale". In our view, classification under 2309 9010, a residual entry for bulk feed, would be both factually inaccurate and legally unsustainable. 46. For all the foregoing reasons, we find that the correct classification of the imported nutritionally balanced dog and cat feed in 20kg. bags is under CTH 2309 1000 - "Dog or cat food, put up for retail sale," attracting Basic Customs Duty at the applicable rate. 47. In view of our aforesaid findings, we do not see any reason for interfering with the Advance Ruling Order dated 4th July 2025 passed by the CAAR. 48. This, now only leaves us to deal with the Judgements relied upon by Mr. Sachdeva on behalf of the Appellants. The first judgement that Mr. Sachdev....