2026-VIL-802-CESTAT-MUM-CU
  1. Home
  2. 2026-VIL-802-CESTAT-MUM-CU

CUSTOMS CESTAT Cases

Customs - Classification of mandarin orange concentrate - The appellant imported 'Mandarin (Kinow) Frozen Concentrate' and classified it under Tariff entry 2009 1100 (orange juice) - Department reclassified it under Tariff entry 2009 3900 (juice of any other single citrus fruit) - whether the orange/mandarin juice concentrate is classifiable under CTI 2009 1100 as per the appellants or under CTI 2009 3900 as per Revenue – HELD - The Customs Tariff makes a clear distinction between "Oranges" and "Mandarins (including tangerines and satsumas)" under Chapter 8, and this distinction extends to their juices under Chapter 20. The HSN and the Explanatory Notes also treat oranges and mandarins as distinct fruits and their juices accordingly. The application of the "common parlance" test cannot override the clear statutory scheme and the term "orange juice" under Heading 2009 must be read consistently with the meaning ascribed to "oranges" elsewhere in the Act - The mandarin orange concentrate cannot be classified under the "orange juice" sub-headings and must be classified under the residuary "juice of any other single citrus fruit" sub-heading - The appellant’s claim that Mandarin Frozen Concentrate is classifiable under Tariff Item 2009.11.00 as orange juice, is not acceptable. The classification of Mandarin Orange Juice concentrate under Tariff entry 2009 3900, by the impugned order is upheld – The appeal is answered in favour of the Revenue on the merits of classification and in favour of the appellants on the issue of limitation – The appeal is partly allowed - Extended period of limitation - The Department invoked the extended period of limitation under Section 28(4) of the Customs Act - HELD - The extended period of limitation cannot be invoked as there was no suppression or misdeclaration with intent to evade payment of duty. The appellant was a regular importer, and the classification adopted by the appellant was known to the Department. The demand arose from an audit objection, and there was no positive act by the appellant to evade payment of duty. When a demand is based on an audit objection, there cannot be any allegation of suppression.
Download File

Quick Search

/

Advance Search

GST Resources

/

Gst Rate Finder

Weekly Summary

VIL Video

GSTAT Appeal filed wrongly...
By CA Vivek Jalan

Create Account

Security-Code
New Code?

Log In

New User ? Forgot Password ?

Forgot Password

Security-Code
New Code?
Please Note: This facility is only for Subscribing Members.

Email this page

Security-Code
New Code?

Feedback this page

Schedule a Demo

Schedule a demo to know the features and advantages of VILGST portal. Get to know the tips to find the desired results in faster way.

Security-Code
New Code?

Caselaw Request Form (CRF)

Didn’t find what you are searching for? No worries, please give us the following details and VIL will email you the desired Caselaws at the earliest:

Security-Code
New Code?