Ascensia Diabetes Care India Pvt. Ltd. Vs Union of India and Anr. (Bombay High Court)
The Bombay High Court considered a writ petition challenging an order dated 31 December 2020 concerning the customs classification of imported blood glucose monitoring systems (Glucometers) marketed under the “Contour” brand. The petitioner imported glucometers and classified them under Customs Tariff Heading (CTH) 9027, claiming nil basic customs duty and paying IGST at the applicable rate. During a post-clearance audit, the Customs Department alleged that the goods had been incorrectly classified and ought to fall under CTH 9018, resulting in a demand for differential customs duty. A show cause notice was issued after pre-notice consultation, proposing recovery of the differential duty.
Petitioner’s Contentions
The petitioner replied that the imported glucometers were correctly classifiable under CTH 9027. It relied upon an earlier decision of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) in Bayer Pharmaceuticals Pvt. Ltd., where identical goods had been held classifiable under Heading 9027 rather than Heading 9018. The petitioner also explained that it had acquired Bayer’s diabetes care business and that the earlier CESTAT decision effectively concerned the same products. It was submitted that judicial discipline required the adjudicating authority to follow the binding CESTAT decision.
