In re Infinity Export (CAAR Delhi)
In a recent decision, the Customs Authority for Advance Rulings (CAAR), Delhi, dismissed four applications filed by M/s Infinity Export seeking advance rulings on the classification of various forms of Roasted Areca Nuts—whole, split, and cut—under Customs Tariff Heading (CTH) 2008 19 20. The applications were filed on 11th March 2025 under Section 28-H of the Customs Act, 1962. These applications were to determine the appropriate classification and potential customs treatment of the products in question, a vital issue for trade compliance and duty implications.
As per procedure outlined in Section 28-I of the Customs Act, 1962, and the CAAR Regulations, 2021, the Authority initiated processing of the applications and provided several opportunities to the applicant to present their case during personal hearings. Despite multiple notices via email (dated 17.06.2025 and 08.07.2025) for hearings scheduled on 19.06.2025, 10.07.2025, 11.07.2025, and 14.07.2025, the applicant failed to attend any. The Authority also attempted to reach the applicant through telephonic and electronic communication, but received no response.
Given the repeated non-appearance and failure to engage with the hearing process, the CAAR invoked sub-rule (10) of Rule 8 of the CAAR Regulations, 2021. This rule empowers the Authority to reject an application for non-prosecution if the applicant fails to appear on the scheduled dates. Emphasizing principles embedded in legal maxims such as “Vigilantibus non dormientibus jura subveniunt” (the law aids the vigilant, not those who sleep over their rights) and “Interest reipublicae ut sit finis litium” (it is in the interest of the State that litigation must come to an end), the Authority found no justification to keep the matter pending.
