Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

Home Case Index All Cases Customs Customs + SC Customs - 2022 (7) TMI SC This

  • Login
  • Cases Cited
  • Referred In
  • Summary

Forgot password       New User/ Regiser

⇒ Register to get Live Demo



 

2022 (7) TMI 471 - SC - Customs


Issues Involved:
1. Classification of dried pomegranate seeds ('anardana') under the Customs Tariff Act, 1975.
2. Application of the Harmonized System of Nomenclature (HSN) and General Rules of Interpretation (GRI).
3. Interpretation of 'edible' in the context of Chapter 8 of the Customs Tariff Act.
4. Analysis of sub-headings 0813.40.90 and 1209.99.90.
5. Burden of proof in classification disputes.

Detailed Analysis:

1. Classification of Dried Pomegranate Seeds ('Anardana'):
The core issue is whether 'anardana' should be classified under Heading 0813 as claimed by the Revenue or under Heading 1209 as claimed by the importers. The Revenue argues that 'anardana' falls under sub-heading 0813.40.90, attracting a higher duty, while the importers contend it should fall under sub-heading 1209.99.90, attracting a lower duty.

2. Application of the Harmonized System of Nomenclature (HSN) and General Rules of Interpretation (GRI):
The HSN, adopted by India through the Customs Tariff Act, 1975, is used to classify goods. The classification process involves selecting the appropriate Chapter, Heading, and sub-heading. The General Rules of Interpretation (GRI) guide this process. GRI 1 states that classification should be based on the terms of the Headings and any relative Section or Chapter Notes. If classification under GRI 1 is not clear, GRI 3 provides further rules, prioritizing specific descriptions and essential characteristics.

3. Interpretation of 'Edible' in the Context of Chapter 8:
The term 'edible' is crucial for classification under Chapter 8. The court emphasized that 'edible' should be interpreted using the common parlance test, meaning how it is commonly understood in trade. The court cited various sources to conclude that 'anardana' is made from wild pomegranates, which are not consumed as fresh fruit, thus differentiating it from the pomegranates under Heading 0810.

4. Analysis of Sub-headings 0813.40.90 and 1209.99.90:
- Sub-heading 0813.40.90: This covers dried fruits that are fresh under Headings 08.07 to 08.10. The court noted that 'anardana' is made from wild pomegranates, which are not typically consumed fresh, thus not fitting this sub-heading.
- Sub-heading 1209.99.90: This covers seeds, fruits, and spores used for sowing. The court found that 'anardana' fits this description better, supported by the Import Policy stating that "import of pomegranate seeds will be free," indicating no licensing restrictions.

5. Burden of Proof in Classification Disputes:
The court reiterated that when the Revenue challenges the classification by the assessee, the burden is on the Revenue to prove that the goods fall under a different heading. The CESTAT's finding that 'anardana' is a dried product of wild pomegranates, not consumed as fresh fruit, was supported by substantial evidence, including certificates from horticultural authorities and scientific studies.

Conclusion:
The court dismissed the Revenue's appeals, upholding the classification of 'anardana' under sub-heading 1209.99.90. The court suggested that the Revenue might consider a policy decision or specific customs duty for 'anardana' to avoid future litigation. The appeals were dismissed without costs.

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates