Case Law Details
In re Konet Technology Inc. (CAAR Mumbai)
The Customs Authority for Advance Ruling (CAAR), Mumbai, considered an application filed by M/s. Konet Technology Inc. seeking an advance ruling on the classification of “Roasted Areca Nuts (Whole & Cut)” under the First Schedule of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975. The application was submitted on 07.04.2026 under Section 28-I(1) of the Customs Act, 1962.
The applicant stated that it intended to import roasted areca nuts from countries including Indonesia, Sri Lanka, Myanmar, and Singapore. According to the applicant, such goods should be classified under tariff item 2008 1991, which covers roasted nuts under Chapter Heading 2008 relating to edible fruits, nuts, and other plant parts. The applicant relied on HSN Explanatory Notes, asserting that roasting qualifies the goods for classification under the specified heading. The applicant also cited judicial precedents, including Supreme Court decisions, to emphasize that HSN Explanatory Notes serve as a reliable guide for classification.
Following receipt of the application, CAAR forwarded the matter to multiple jurisdictional Customs Commissionerates, including those at Nhava Sheva, Chennai, Mundra, and Tuticorin, requesting comments and relevant records. A personal hearing was conducted on 27.04.2026, where the applicant’s authorized representative reiterated that roasted areca nuts should be classified under CTI 20081991. The representative relied on prior judicial decisions, including a Madras High Court judgment that had addressed similar classification issues. No representative from the department appeared for the hearing.
During its examination, CAAR focused on the statutory provisions governing the admissibility of advance ruling applications. It referred to Section 28-I(2) of the Customs Act, 1962, which allows the authority to reject applications where the question raised is already pending or has been decided by an appellate tribunal or court. The proviso specifically bars admission of applications involving issues already adjudicated by courts.
The Authority observed that the precise issue raised by the applicant—classification of roasted areca/betel nuts—had already been adjudicated by the Madras High Court in its judgment dated 01.08.2023. In that case, the High Court had upheld earlier rulings of the Authority on the same issue. Furthermore, CAAR noted that both it and CAAR Delhi had issued multiple rulings on similar applications involving roasted areca nuts imported through various ports across India. All such rulings were based on the same legal position affirmed by the High Court.
Given that the issue presented in the current application was identical to one already decided by a court, CAAR held that the statutory bar under the proviso to Section 28-I(2)(b) squarely applied. As a result, the Authority concluded that it could not entertain or allow the application.
Accordingly, CAAR rejected the application, holding that since the classification issue had already been settled by the Madras High Court, it was not permissible to issue a fresh advance ruling on the same question. The application was therefore not allowed and disposed of.
FULL TEXT OF THE ORDER OF CUSTOMS AUTHORITY OF ADVANCE RULING, MUMBAI
M/s. Konet Technology Inc. (IEC No.: AMPPR4120H) (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Applicant’) filed applications (CAAR- 1) for advance ruling in the Office of Secretary, Customs Authority for Advance Ruling (CAAR) Mumbai. The said applications were received in the secretariat of the CAAR, Mumbai on 07.04.2026 along with its enclosures in terms of Section 281-1(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 the “Roasted Areca Nuts (Whole & Cut)” under the First Schedule of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975.
2. Submission by the Applicant:
2.1 The applicant submitted that they are a firm in the name and style of M/s. Konet Technology Inc. (IEC No.: AMPPR4120H). They intend to import “Roasted Areca Nuts (Whole) And Roasted Areca Nuts Cut” from, Indonesia, Sri Lanka, Burma/Myanmar Singapore etc. As per the present scheme of Classification of commodities under the Customs Tariff Act, 1975, Fruits, Nuts and other edible parts of plants are classified under the Chapter Heading 2008, and other roasted nuts are particularly and specifically classified under the Tariff Item 2008 1991:
2.2 The Applicant submitted that the proposed item to be imported are ‘roasted betel nut/ areca nuts (whole/cut) and 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. The Applicant further submitted several 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.
3. Port of Import and reply from Jurisdictional Commissionerate
3.1 In terms of provisions of the Section 28-1 (1) of the Customs Act, 1962 read with Sub-Regulation no. (7) of the Regulation no. 8 of the Customs Authority for Advance Rulings Regulations, 2021, on the receipt of the said application, office of the CAAR, Mumbai forwarded copy of the said application/submissions to the concerned Jurisdictional Customs Commissionerate i.e. 1.) The Commissioner of Customs, Nhava Sheva-II, Jawaharlal Nehru Customs House, Nhava Sheva, TaI: Uran, Dist- Raigad, Maharashtra-400707, 2.) Commissioner of Customs, Chennai (Import), Custom House No. 60 Rajaji Salai Chennai— 600001, 3.) The Principle Commissioner of Customs, Mundra 5B, Port User Building, Mundra Port, Mundra, Kutch, Gujrat-370421, 4.) The Commissioner of Customs (Import), Custom House, New Harbour Estate, Tuticorin calling upon them to furnish the relevant records with comments, if any, in respect of said application on 09.04.2026 and 24.04.2026.
4. Records of Personal Hearing
4.1 A personal hearing was held on 27.04.2026 at 03.00 PM wherein, Shri E. Ramesh, AR appeared for the Personal Hearing in the matter on behalf of the applicant. The learned AR reiterated that Roasted Areca Nuts merit classification under CTI 20081991. He relied upon the several case laws including Hon’ble Madras High Court judgement in the matter of the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal (CMA) No’s 600/2023, No. 1206/2023 and No 1750/2023, the Commissioner of Customs, Chennai II Commissionerate Vs M/s Shahnaz Commodities International P. Ltd. & Others, in which the issue has already been decided.
Nobody appeared for PH from the department side.
5. Discussions and Findings:
5.1 As the applicant cited that the issue had already been decided by the Hon’ble High Court in which ruling of the authority was upheld. In this backdrop, the relevant excerpts of sub section (2) of section 281 of Customs Act, 1962 is important, which is produced 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 59[***] 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:”
6. In the present case, the precise issue relating to the classification of roasted areca/betel nuts has already been adjudicated by the Hon’ble High Court of Madras in a judgement dated 01.08.2023 in the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal (CMA) Nos 600/2023, No. 1206/2023 and No: 1750/2023, in the matter of the Commissioner of Customs, Chennai-II Commissionerate Vs M/s Shahnaz Commodities International P. Ltd. M/s. Neena Enterprises and M/s Universal Impex in which the ruling passed by this authority was upheld.
7. This Authority as well as CAAR, Delhi have already issued multiple rulings in a sizeable number of applications intending, import of the subject ‘Roasted Areca Nut’s various major/minor ports/Inland container Depots, spread across the country. The all such rulings are based on the same matter as upheld by the Hon’ble High Court of Madras in its order dated 01.08.2023 cited above. In the instant case also the issue is identical/similar one.
8. Accordingly, I find that the question raised by the applicant is identical to one already decided by a Court, and the statutory bar contained in the proviso to Section 28-I(2)(b) of the Customs Act, 1962 squarely applies.
9. In view of the forgoing 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), therefore, in accordance with the provisions of Section 28-1, sub-section (2); and proviso (b) of the first proviso of sub-section (2) of section 28-I of Customs Act, 1962, I decide ‘not to allow’ the application.
10. The application is rejected and disposed of accordingly.
Author Bio
