In re Jineshwar Impex (CAAR Mumbai)
Summary: M/s Jineshwar Impex filed an application before the Customs Authority for Advance Rulings, Mumbai seeking an advance ruling on classification of “Roasted Areca Nut (Whole/Split/Cut)”. The application was received on 22.06.2026 under Section 28H(1) of the Customs Act, 1962. The applicant proposed to import roasted areca nuts from Burma (Myanmar), Indonesia, Vietnam, Sri Lanka, Thailand, Cambodia, Laos, Bangladesh, UAE and Singapore. The applicant sought classification under CTH 2008 19 91, covering “Other Roasted Nuts and Seeds”.
The applicant described a process involving de-husking and drying, followed by repeated heating and roasting in a seed-roasting oven at approximately 130°C to 150°C, cooling and re-feeding into the oven, with the cycle repeated until moisture content fell below 10%. The applicant submitted that roasting produced changes in appearance and chemical characteristics, including changes in tannin and arecoline content, and contended that the goods were distinct from raw or merely dried areca nuts.
The applicant relied upon the HSN Explanatory Notes to Chapters 8 and 20, particularly the portion concerning almonds, groundnuts, areca or betel nuts and other nuts which are dry-roasted, oil-roasted or fat-roasted. It also relied upon the decisions referred to in the application, including Commissioner of Customs Vs Shahnaz Commodities International P. Ltd., C.M.A. Nos. 600/2023, 1206/2023 and 1750/2023, as well as the earlier CAAR ruling in In re Universal Impex (CAAR Mumbai). The applicant also referred to M.L. Ltd. v. Commissioner of Customs, 2010 (258) E.L.T. 321 (S.C.); Holostick India Ltd. v. Commissioner of Central Excise, Noida, 2015 (318) E.L.T. 529 (S.C.); and Collector of Central Excise, Shillong v. Wood Craft Products Ltd., 1995 (77) E.L.T. 23 (S.C.), in support of the relevance of HSN Explanatory Notes.
