In re G. C. Chemie Pharmic Limited (CAAR Mumbai)
The Customs Authority for Advance Rulings (CAAR), Mumbai, considered an application filed by M/s G. C. Chemie Pharmic Limited seeking modification and rectification of Advance Ruling No. CAAR/Mum/ARC/06 & 07/2026-27 dated 23.04.2026 under Regulations 21 and 22 of the Customs Authority for Advance Rulings Regulations, 2021. The applicant was heard during a personal hearing held on 20.07.2026.
The original advance ruling had decided the classification of Pelaforce EMA1170 (Pelargonium Sidoides Root Extract) and the applicability of a customs exemption notification. It held that the product was classifiable under Customs Tariff Heading (CTH) 3003, specifically HS Code 3003 90 90, as “Other” medicaments under the First Schedule to the Customs Tariff Act, 1975, applying General Rules for Interpretation (GIR) Rules 1 and 3(b). It also held that the product was not eligible for the concessional rate of duty under Notification No. 45/2025-Customs dated 24.10.2025.
The applicant sought rectification of the ruling on several grounds. It reiterated through additional submissions dated 22.06.2026 that Pelaforce EMA1170 is a simple vegetable extract obtained by hydro-ethanolic extraction of the roots of Pelargonium Sidoides and merits classification under CTH 1302 19 19. According to the applicant, the addition of 30% Maltodextrin serves only as an inert carrier for standardisation and spray drying and, as clarified in the HSN Explanatory Notes, does not alter the classification of vegetable extracts. The applicant relied upon Cachet Pharmaceuticals (P) Ltd. v. Commissioner of Customs, New Delhi [2017 (356) E.L.T. 300 (Tri.-Del.)], US Customs Ruling HQ H225004, and US Customs Ruling NY N241904 in support of the proposition that plant extracts containing inert carriers continue to remain classifiable under Heading 1302. It further submitted that the product is imported in bulk as a raw material for manufacture of pharmaceutical formulations, is neither a medicament nor put up in measured doses or retail packings, and that it had not been given an opportunity to make submissions regarding classification under CTSH 3003 90 920 instead of CTSH 1302 19 19.
