In re Envora Exim (CAAR Mumbai)
Summary: The Customs Authority for Advance Rulings (CAAR), Mumbai, considered an application filed by ENVORA EXIM seeking an advance ruling on the customs tariff classification of roasted areca nuts, both whole and cut, proposed to be imported from Burma, Indonesia and Sri Lanka. The applicant sought confirmation that the goods were classifiable under Customs Tariff Item 2008 19 91 of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975, rather than under Chapter 8. It submitted that the areca nuts would undergo roasting at temperatures exceeding 150°C, with repeated heating and cooling until their moisture content was reduced below 6 per cent. According to the applicant, roasting transformed the goods into prepared products covered by Heading 2008. Reliance was placed on the Harmonised System Explanatory Notes, judicial decisions on tariff classification and earlier rulings concerning roasted betel nuts.
The applicant further relied on the decision in Commissioner of Customs Vs Shahnaz Commodities International P. Ltd. (Madras High Court), wherein the classification of roasted areca or betel nuts under Heading 2008 had been upheld. It also referred to earlier Supreme Court decisions concerning classification principles and the applicability of HSN Explanatory Notes. The applicant claimed eligibility for concessional customs duty under Serial No. 172 of Notification No. 41/2019-Cus., dated 31 December 2019, amending Notification No. 46/2011-Cus., subject to the prescribed conditions. During the proceedings, the jurisdictional Customs Commissionerate did not furnish comments, and no departmental representative appeared at the personal hearing held on 3 September 2026. The Authority examined whether the application was maintainable in view of Section 28-I(2)(b) of the Customs Act, 1962, which restricts admission of an advance ruling application involving a question already decided by the Appellate Tribunal or any Court.
CAAR Mumbai observed that the Madras High Court had already adjudicated the precise classification issue in its judgment dated 1 August 2023 in the matters involving Shahnaz Commodities International Pvt. Ltd., Universal Impex and Neena Enterprises. The High Court had upheld the earlier advance ruling classifying roasted areca nuts under the relevant Heading 2008 tariff entry. The Authority found no material distinguishing feature or new factual circumstance warranting reconsideration of the same classification question. Accordingly, it held that the application attracted the statutory bar under Section 28-I(2)(b) and disallowed the application without issuing a fresh classification ruling. Regarding the claimed concessional customs duty, it clarified that eligibility must be established independently with reference to the applicable tariff entry, exemption conditions and legal position prevailing on the relevant date of importation. The application was therefore disposed of.
Cases Discussed:
- Commissioner of Customs Vs Shahnaz Commodities International P. Ltd. (Madras High Court) – Judgment dated 01.08.2023, C.M.A. Nos. 600/2023, 1206/2023 and 1750/2023, as referred to in the ruling. Relied upon as the earlier judicial determination of roasted areca nut classification, attracting Section 28-I(2)(b).
- Commissioner of Customs Vs Universal Impex and M/s Neena Enterprises (Madras High Court) – W.A. Nos. 3647 and 3648 of 2024, as recorded in the order. The Authority referred to the High Court’s affirmation of the earlier classification ruling.
- Commissioner of Customs & Central Excise, Goa Vs Phil Corporation Ltd. (Supreme Court) – 2008 (223) E.L.T. 9 (S.C.). Cited by the applicant concerning roasting as preparation.
- Amrit Agro Industries Ltd. Vs Commissioner of Central Excise, Ghaziabad (Supreme Court) – 2007 (210) E.L.T. 183 (S.C.). Cited by the applicant regarding classification of roasted nuts.
- Holostick India Ltd. Vs Commissioner of Central Excise, Noida (Supreme Court) – Cited regarding the relevance of HSN Explanatory Notes.
- L.M.L. Ltd. Vs Commissioner of Customs (Supreme Court) – Cited on tariff interpretation and HSN guidance.
- Collector of Central Excise, Shillong Vs Wood Craft Products Ltd. (Supreme Court) – Cited on the use of HSN Explanatory Notes in classification.
Five Alternative SEO Titles:
- CAAR Mumbai Rejects Fresh Advance Ruling on Roasted Betel Nuts
- Madras HC Precedent Bars Areca Nut Ruling: CAAR Mumbai
- CAAR Mumbai Disallows ENVORA EXIM’s Customs Classification Application
- CAAR Mumbai Applies Section 28-I(2)(b) to Roasted Areca Nuts
- CAAR Mumbai Declines Repeat Ruling on Roasted Areca Nut Classification
Imports of ‘Roasted Areca Nuts- HS code: 2008 1991
FULL TEXT OF THE ORDER OF CUSTOMS AUTHORITY FOR ADVANCE RULINGS, MUMBAI
1. A copy of this order made under sub-section (2) of Section 28-I of the Customs Act, 1962 is granted to the concerned free of charge.
2. Any appeal against this Advance Ruling order shall lie before the jurisdictional High Court of concerned jurisdiction, within 60 days from the date of the communication of such ruling or order.
3. The advance ruling pronounced by the Authority under Section 28-I shall remain valid for five years or till there is a change in law or facts on the basis of which the advance ruling has been pronounced, whichever is earlier.
4. Where the Authority finds that the advance ruling was obtained by the applicant by fraud or misrepresentation of facts, the same shall be declared void ab initio.
ORDER
M/s ENVORA EXIM (IEC No.: BNYPD7664M) (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Applicant’) filed an application (CAAR-1) for advance ruling in the Office of Secretary, Customs Authority for Advance Ruling (CAAR) Mumbai. The said application was received in the secretariat of the CAAR, Mumbai on 13.07.2026 along with its enclosures in terms of Section 28H(1) of the Customs Act, 1962 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’ also). The Applicant is seeking advance ruling on the issue of classification of ‘Roasted Areca Nuts (Whole & Cut)’ under the First Schedule of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975.
The Applicant has sought ruling in respect of following question(s):
(i) Whether the goods sought to be imported, namely, ‘Roasted Betel nut/Areca Nut(Whole/cut)’ are classifiable under the HS Code 20081991 as per Schedule-I of the Customs Tariff Act,1975?
(ii) Whether subjecting the betel nuts/areca nut to the processes detailed infra would qualify the products to be described as Roasted Betel nut/Areca Nut in order to classify the same under the HS Code 20081991 of the Customs Tariff Act,1975 or any other Chapter heading?
2. Submission by the Applicant:
2.1 The applicant submitted that they are a firm operating under the name and style of M/s ENVORA EXIM (IEC No.: BNYPD7664M). They intend to import “Roasted Areca Nuts (Whole) and Roasted Areca Nuts (Cut)” from Burma, Indonesia, Sri Lanka. It is the contention of the applicant that, under the existing Scheme of Classification of commodities contained in the First Schedule to the Customs Tariff Act, 1975, fruits, nuts and other edible parts of plants, otherwise prepared or preserved, are classifiable under Chapter Heading 2008. The applicant has further submitted that roasted nuts are specifically covered under Tariff Item 2008 19 91, which provides for “Other roasted nuts and seeds.” Accordingly, the applicant contends that the proposed imported goods, namely Roasted Areca Nuts (Whole) and Roasted Areca Nuts (Cut), being roasted and prepared products, merit classification under Customs Tariff Item 2008 19 91.
2.2 The Applicant submitted that the proposed goods to be imported namely Roasted Betel Nuts/Areca Nuts (Whole and Cut), are appropriately classifiable under Customs Tariff Item 2008 19 91, the process of roasting imparts the essential character of a prepared or preserved product, thereby bringing the goods within the scope of Heading 2008. The HSN Explanatory Notes specifically recognize roasted nuts under this heading, and therefore the impugned goods merit classification under Tariff Item 2008 19 91. The Applicant has further relied upon various judgments of the Hon’ble Supreme Court to contend that the HSN Explanatory Notes constitute a safe, reliable, and dependable guide for the interpretation and classification of goods under the Customs Tariff, as they provide valuable guidance in determining the appropriate classification of goods under the Customs Tariff Act, 1975.
2.3 The Applicant submitted that the process of “roasting” is neither defined under the Customs Tariff Act, 1975, nor in the HSN Explanatory Notes, or under any of the relevant Sections or Chapters of the Customs Tariff. In the absence of any specific statutory or tariff definition, the Applicant contended that recourse may be had to the ordinary dictionary meaning and other authoritative literature to ascertain the meaning and scope of the term “roasting”.
Merriam-Webster:
a.: to cook by exposing to dry heat (as in an oven or before a fire) or by surrounding with hot embers, sand, or stones
b: to dry and parch by exposure to heat,
Britannica:
Roasting, cooking, primarily of meats but also of corn ears, potatoes, or other vegetables thus prepared, by exposure to dry radiant heat either over an open fire, within a reflecting-surface oven, or in some cases within surrounding hot embers, sand, or stones.
2.4 With the above background regarding the process of roasting, the process involved in the proposed imported goods is detailed as follows:
3.4.1 The roasting of seeds of fresh areca nuts wholly or cut into two pieces are roasted by the following steps: –
A. De-husking the raw betel/areca nut and drying the same before being fed into the roasting oven;
B. Feeding the fresh areca nuts into a seed roasting oven, heating at the temperature of more than 150 deg. C;
C. Taking the areca nuts out of the oven, cooling at room temperature and feeding back into the oven, heating and roasting again, and perform in this cycle until the moisture content of the areca nuts is less than 6 percent; and By virtue of ‘roasting’ as per the processes detailed above, the betelnut/areca nut proposed to be imported by the appellant would fall under the HS Code 20081991 as ‘Other Roasted Nuts and Seed’ and this Application before the Hon’ble Authority is to benignly seek a Ruling on the same.
3. Statement Containing the Applicants interpretation of law and/or Facts:
3.1 The applicant submits that the classification of items is governed by the scheme of classification under the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 read with the “The General Rules for The Interpretation of Import Tariff”. As per the statutory scheme of 1975 Act, ‘roasted nuts’ are specifically classifiable under the ‘HS Code 20081991’. Further, in terms of Rule.1 of “The General Rules for The Interpretation of Import Tariff”, classification of the item shall be determined according to the terms of the heading and any relative section or chapter notes: Therefore, both by the statutory provisions of the Act as well as Rules for classification, the item proposed to be imported, namely, ‘roasted areca nut’ are appropriately classifiable under the HS Code 20081991 only.
3.2 The Applicant submits that the Harmonized Commodity Description and Coding System generally referred to as the “Harmonized System” or simply “HS” is a multipurpose international product nomenclature developed by the World Customs Organization (WCC). The system is used by more than 200 member countries and economics as a basis for their Customs tariffs and for the collection of international trade statistics. The official interpretation of the HS is given in the Explanatory Notes published by the WCO and offers a safe guide to interpret and classify the commodity under consideration.
As per the HSN Explanatory Notes to the Chapter Heading 2008 given below, ‘Dry Roasted Areca (or Betel) Nuts’ are specifically covered under the Chapter Heading 2008: This heading covers fruit, nuts and other edible parts of plants, whether whole, in pieces or crushed, including mixtures thereof, prepared or preserved otherwise than by any of the processes specified in other Chapters or in the preceding headings of this Chapter. It includes, inter alia:
1. Almonds, ground-nuts, areca (or betel) nuts and other nuts, dry roasted, oil-roasted or fat-roasted, whether or not containing or coated with vegetable oil, salt, flavours, spices or other additives.
3.3 Hence from the above, the Applicant submits that the proposed item to be imported ‘roasted betelnut/ areca nut (whole cut) are classifiable under the HS Code 2008 1991 by virtue of mere roasting as clearly given in the HSN Explanatory Note by the product name. Although the aspect of classification of ‘roasted betelnut/ areca nut’ is unambiguously clear by the scheme of classification as well as HSN Explanatory Note to the relevant Chapter Heading, the Applicant craves to submit the following case law citations wherein the Hon’ble Supreme Court has decided and reiterated that the HSN Explanatory Note is the safe and dependable guide in the matters of classification of items:
(i). L.M.L. Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Customs
(ii). Holostick India Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Central Excise, Noida
(iii). Collector of Central Excise, Shillong Versus Wood Craft Products Ltd
3.4 Accordingly, the Applicant submits that by the very description of the item as ‘Roasted Betelnut areca nut’ the item clearly falls under the HS Code 2008 1991 in terms of Rule 1 of the GIR strongly supported by the relevant HSN EN.
3.5 The Applicant submits that both as per the Scheme of Classification under the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 for the Chapter Heading 2008 and the HSN Explanatory Notes reproduced above, the items classifiable under the Chapter Heading 2008 should not be elsewhere specified or included nor prepared or preserved otherwise than by any of the processes specified in other Chapters or in the preceding headings of this Chapter. Examined in this context, the competing entries for the item namely ‘betel nut/ areca nut’ are the HS Code 08029000 and 20081991. For proper appreciation of facts, relevant entries, Chapter Notes and HSN Explanatory Notes of these Chapters are juxtaposed and examined as below:
3.5.1 UNDER THE HS CODE 08029000: While Chapter 8 of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 deals with ‘edible fruits and nuts’ that include areca/betel nut. Chapter 21 deals with miscellaneous edible preparations. A closer reading of the Chapter Note and the General Explanatory Note to the Chapter 08 would convey that only ‘nuts’ that are processed for preservation and as the manner prescribed therein are classified under the Chapter 08.
3.5.2 Further, submitted that the nuts classifiable under this Chapter should be treated only for the purpose of additional preservation or stabilisation or to improve or maintain their appearance. In effect, any treatment that is aimed at other than or beyond preservation/stabilisation or improve/maintain appearance automatically makes the product ineligible for classification under the Chapter 08 itself. This has been legibly brought out in the HSN General Explanatory. This has been legibly brought out in the HSN General Explanatory to the Chapter 08 reproduced below:
GENERAL This Chapter covers fruit, nuts and peel of citrus fruit or melons (including watermelons), generally intended for human consumption (whether as presented or after processing). They may be fresh (including chilled), frozen (whether or not previously cooked by steaming or boiling in water or containing added sweetening matter) or dried (including dehydrated, evaporated or freeze-dried): provided they are unsuitable for immediate consumption in that state, they may be provisionally preserved (e.g., by sulphur dioxide gas, in brine, in sulphur water or in other preservative solutions).
The term “chilled” means that the temperature of a product has been reduced, generally to around 0°C, without the product being frozen. However, some products, such as melons and certain citrus fruit, may be considered to be chilled when their temperature has been reduced to and maintained at + 10°C. The expression “frozen” means that the product has been cooled to below the product’s freezing point until it is frozen throughout. Fruit and nuts of this Chapter may be whole, sliced, chopped, shredded, stoned, pulped, grated, peeled or shelled.
It should be noted that homogenisation, by itself, does not qualify a product of this Chapter for classification as a preparation of Chapter 20.
The addition of small quantities of sugar does not affect the classification of fruit in this Chapter. The Chapter also includes dried fruit (e.g., dates and prunes), the exterior of which may be covered with a deposit of dried natural sugar thus giving the fruit an appearance somewhat similar to that of the crystallised fruit of heading 2006.
However, this Chapter does not cover fruit preserved by osmotic dehydration. The expression “osmotic dehydration” refers to a process whereby pieces of fruit are subjected to prolonged soaking in concentrated sugar syrup so that much of the water and the natural sugar of the fruit is replaced by sugar from the syrup. The fruit may subsequently be air-dried to further reduce the moisture content. Such fruit is classified in Chapter 20 (heading 20.08). 3.5.3 From the above, it is amply clear that none of the processes referred above is employed in the product proposed to be imported. Further, the fruits air-dried to reduce moisture itself excludes it from the purview of Chapter 108 and places the same under the Chapter 20. Therefore, the processes involved in the proposed import item, ‘Roasted Areca Nut (Whole /split) is completely different from the preservative processes for the products falling under the Chapter Heading 0802 and hence would not fall under the said Chapter.
3.6 The Applicant submits that the vital question as to whether the roasted nuts would fall under the Chapter Heading 0802 or Chapter Heading 2008 was affirmatively answered in favour of the latter (CTH 2008) by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case at Commissioner of Customs & Central Excise, Goa Vs Phil Corporation Ltd reported in 2008 (223) E.L.T 9 (S.C). Similarly, while answering whether ‘roasted peanut’ would fall under Chapter 21 or under Chapter 20, the Apex Court in the case of M/s. Amrit Agro Industries Ltd Vs Commissioner of Central Excise, Ghaziabad reported in 2007(210) E.L.T 183 (S.C) held that roasted nuts are classifiable under the Chapter 20. In both the cases, the Department vehemently argued in favour of classifying the ‘roasted nuts’ under Chapter 20 and the same was upheld. Hence, the settled position of law is that nuts falling under Chapter 08 would be classified under Chapter 20, if the same is subjected to the process of roasting.
3.7 The applicant further submits that the issue on hand has been unequivocally dealt with by the Hon’ble High Court of Madras in its order in the case of Commissioner of Customs, Chennai-II Versus Shahnaz Commodities International Pvt. Ltd reported in 2023 (386) E.L.T 214 (Mad), wherein the classification of roasted betelnut has been held to be classifiable under the HS Code 2008 1920 as per the then scheme of classification under the Customs Tariff Act, 1975. The said order of the Hon’ble High Court has been accepted by the government and thus attained finality. Despite this settled position of law regarding classification of roasted betelnut under the Chapter Heading 2008, filing of this application is necessitated due to the change in the Tariff Item pertaining to other roasted nuts and seeds as the same is now brought under the new entry, 2008 1991 as per the Finance Bill, 2025. The introduction of new entry, 2008 1920 has not altered the settled fact that the roasted betelnut is classifiable under the HS Code 2008 1991, except there is a change in the tariff rate 150% instead of 30% that was in vogue prior to the Finance Bill 2025. 3.9 The applicant contends that by virtue of classification under the HS Code 2008 1991, the roasted betelnut and roasted walnuts are eligible for concessional rate of duty under Sl. No. 172 of the Notification of Customs No. 46/2011 dated 01.06.2011 as amended by the Notification No. 41/2019 dated 31.12.2019, the relevant entry of the same is given below: No Chapter Heading sub-heading & Description Tariff Item 20071010 to 200820 All goods Rate (in % unless otherwise specified 0 172 Therefore, the item proposed to be imported is eligible for the benefit of duty under Sl. No. 172 of the Notification of Customs No. 41/2019 dated 31.12.2019 subject to fulfilment of conditions prescribed therein. 3.10 The applicant submits that the First Bench of the Hon’ble High Court of Madras, in W.A. Nos. 3647 & 3648 of 2024 in the case of Universal Impex, held that betel nut products having moisture content below 10% may be regarded as roasted, subject to compliance with the moisture limit specified in the Advance Ruling Application. Accordingly, the applicant undertakes to ensure that the moisture content of the roasted betel nuts remains below 7%, as specified in Annexure-I to the Application, thereby ensuring that only roasted betel nuts are imported. 3.11 In view of the above, the applicant submits that the goods, namely, roasted betel nuts/areca nuts (whole/cut), are appropriately classifiable under CTH 2008 1991 and eligible for the benefit under Sl. No. 172 of Notification No. 41/2019-Cus. dated 31.12.2019.
4. Port of Import and reply from Jurisdictional Commissionerate
4.1 In terms of Section 28-I(1) of the Customs Act, 1962 read with Regulation 8(7) of the Customs Authority for Advance Rulings Regulations, 2021, a copy of the said application was forwarded by the Office of CAAR, Mumbai to the concerned jurisdictional Customs Commissionerate i.e. The Principal Commissioner of Customs, Customs House, Tuticorin Port, Thoothukudi, Tamil Nadu -628004 on 20.07.2026, seeking the relevant records and comments, if any. However, no response has been received from the Jurisdictional Commissionerate till date.
5. Records of Personal Hearing
5.1 A personal hearing was granted to the Applicant on 03.09.2026. During the hearing, the Applicant’s authorised representative reiterated the submissions made in the application and contended that the imported goods, namely Roasted Areca Nuts (Whole/Cut), are classifiable under Customs Tariff Item 2008 19 91. He also relied upon judicial precedents and earlier advance rulings in support of the claimed classification.
No representative appeared for PH from the department side.
6. Discussions and Findings:
6.1 The Applicant has submitted that the issue involved in the present application has already been decided by the Hon’ble High Court, wherein the ruling of the Authority was upheld. In this backdrop, the relevant excerpts of sub section (2) of section 28I of the Customs Act, 1962, the relevant extract is reproduced below:
“(2) The Authority may, after examining the application and the records called for, by order either allow or reject the application;
Provided that the Authority shall not allow the application where the question raised in the application is-
(a) already pending in the applicant’s case before any officer of customs, the Appellate Tribunal or any Court;
(b) same as in a matter decided already by the Appellate Tribunal or any Court.”
7. In the present case, the precise issue relating to the classification of roasted areca/betel nuts has already been adjudicated upon by the Hon’ble High Court of Madras vide judgment dated 01.08.2023 in C.M.A. Nos. 600/2023, 1206/2023 and 1750/2023 in the matter of Commissioner of Customs, Chennai-II Commissionerate v M/s Shahnaz Commodities International Pvt. Ltd. and M/s Universal Impex and M/s Neena Enterprises. The said decision, concerning the classification of the subject goods, was subsequently considered in W.A. Nos. 3647 and 3648 of 2024, wherein the ruling of the Authority classifying the said goods under CTH 20081920, corresponding to CTH 20081991 under the present Customs Tariff, was upheld.
8. It is further observed that this Authority, as well as the Customs Authority for Advance Rulings, Delhi, has already pronounced several rulings in respect of applications concerning the proposed import of the subject goods, namely, “Roasted Areca Nuts”, through various major and minor ports/Inland Container Depots across the country. The classification issue involved in those applications is the same as, or substantially similar to, the issue which has already been adjudicated upon by the Hon’ble High Court of Madras in its judgment dated 01.08.2023. In the instant application also, the question raised by the applicant concerns the classification of the same goods and does not disclose any material distinguishing feature or new factual circumstance warranting a different consideration.
9. In view of the foregoing, I find that the question raised by the Applicant is the same as the question which has already been decided by an Hon’ble Court. Though question of classification of Roasted Areca Nut decided by Hon’ble High Court of Madras dated 01.08.2023 is not in case filed by Applicant himself, however, as per records perused and facts produced before me, it is seen that the matter abundantly falls within ambit of Section 28 I (2)(b) of the Customs Act, 1962 and said provision can be safely applied to application and question raised there off.
10. As regards the applicant’s reference to the concessional rate of duty under Sl. No. 172 of Notification No. 46/2011-Cus. dated 01.06.2011, as amended by Notification No. 41/2019-Cus. dated 31.12.2019, in respect of the subject goods, namely, “Roasted Areca Nut/Betel Nut”, it is observed that the applicability of a concessional rate under an exemption notification has to be examined with reference to the relevant tariff entry and the specific conditions prescribed in the notification. The eligibility for such exemption/concession is required to be established by the claimant in accordance with the applicable statutory provisions and the conditions of the notification. Further, the applicable rate of duty and conditions are required to be determined with reference to the legal position prevailing on the relevant date of import.
11. In view of the foregoing facts and records of the case, I hereby observe and hold that the question raised in this very application has already been decided by Hon’ble High Court of Madras in its order dated 01.08.2023 (cited as above).
12. Therefore, the application is hereby disallowed and disposed of accordingly.
