Dismissed¶30

Commissioner of Customs Air Cargo Complex Mumbai v. Ingram Micro India Private Limited

Bombay HC25 Jun 2025CUAPP/27/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bombay High Court (OOCJ) dismisses Customs Appeals CUAPP Nos. 7, 27 and 29 of 2024 filed by Commissioner of Customs, Air Cargo Complex, Mumbai against Ingram Micro India Pvt. Ltd.; identical issue already decided by Delhi High Court (2025 (1) TMI 797) concerning interpretation of Notification No.57/2017-Cus dated 30 June 2017; Customs accepted the Delhi High Court ruling and did not challenge it before the Supreme Court; no substantial question of law; appeals dismissed without costs.

What did the court decide?

Since the identical issue was involved before the Hon'ble Delhi High Court concerning the same type of goods, there are no good reasons to admit these appeals. ¶29

Commissioner of Customs Air Cargo Complex Mumbai vs Ingram Micro India Private Limited — Bombay HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Dismissed

¶30

Issue for consideration

Whether these customs appeals give rise to any substantial questions of law, given that the identical issue — the interpretation of Notification No.57/2017-Cus dated 30 June 2017 — was decided by the Hon'ble Delhi High Court involving the same respondents and the very same goods, and the Customs have accepted that decision.

¶29

Court's answer

Since the identical issue was involved before the Hon'ble Delhi High Court concerning the same type of goods, there are no good reasons to admit these appeals.

¶29

Ratio / Principle

The main issue before the Hon'ble Delhi High Court concerned the interpretation of Notification No.57/2017-Cus dated 30 June 2017, and the interpretation put on this Notification by the Hon'ble Delhi High Court has now been accepted by the Customs Authorities.

¶29

Key takeaways

These appeals cannot be said to give rise to any substantial questions of law.ratio¶29

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Customs Appeals (CUAPP) Nos. 7, 27 and 29 of 2024 — Commissioner of Customs, Air Cargo Complex, Mumbai v. Ingram Micro India Pvt. Ltd. — High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction (M. S. Sonak & Jitendra Jain, JJ.), decided 10 July 2025. The issue raised in these appeals was identical to that decided by the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in Commissioner of Customs Air Chennai-VII Commissionerate v. M/s. Ingram Micro India Pvt. Ltd., 2025 (1) TMI 797, incidentally involving the same respondents and the very same goods; the Delhi High Court had accepted the respondents' contentions and held against Customs, and the Customs Authorities have accepted that decision without challenging it before the Hon'ble Supreme Court. The main issue before the Delhi High Court concerned the interpretation of Notification No.57/2017-Cus dated 30 June 2017, and that interpretation now stands accepted by Customs. Held: the appeals give rise to no substantial questions of law; dismissed without any costs order.

¶1

2025:BHC-OS:10667-DB

¶2

Sayyed 901-CUAPP.7.2024.docx

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION

¶4

CUSTOMS APPEAL (CUAPP) NO.7 OF 2024

¶5

Commissioner of Customs,

¶6

Air Cargo Complex, Mumbai ...Appellant

¶7

Versus

¶8

Ingram Micro India Pvt. Ltd. ...Respondent

¶9

WITH

¶10

CUSTOMS APPEAL (CUAPP) NO.27 OF 2024

¶11

Commissioner of Customs, Air Cargo Complex, Mumbai ...Appellant

¶12

Versus

¶13

Ingram Micro India Pvt. Ltd. ...Respondent

¶14

WITH

¶15

CUSTOMS APPEAL (CUAPP) NO.29 OF 2024

¶16

Commissioner of Customs, Air Cargo Complex, Mumbai ...Appellant Versus Ingram Micro India Pvt. Ltd. ...Respondent

¶17

Mr. Yogendra Mishra a/w Ms. Sangeeta Yadav for the Appellant in all appeals.

¶18

Mr. Sriram Sridharan for the Respondent in all appeals.

¶19

CORAM : M. S. Sonak & Jitendra Jain, JJ. DATED : 10 July 2025

¶20

PC.:-

¶21

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

¶22

The issue involved in these appeals, was also involved before the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Commissioner of Customs Air Chennai-VII Commissionerate vs. M/s. Ingram Micro India Pvt. Ltd.¹ ,

¶23

1 2025 (1) TMI 797

¶24

Page 1 of 2

¶25

Sayyed 901-CUAPP.7.2024.docx

¶26

incidentally involving this very Respondents and in respect of the very same goods.

¶27

The Hon’ble Delhi High Court, has accepted the Respondents’ contentions and held against the Customs. Therefore, on the last occasion, we had adjourned the matter to enable Mr. Mishra to seek instructions on whether the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court was challenged by the Customs Authority or whether the same has been accepted by the Customs.

¶28

Mr. Mishra, learned counsel for the Appellant, on instructions, states that the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court has been accepted by the Customs Authorities and not challenged before the Hon’ble Supreme Court.

¶29

Since identical issue was involved before the Hon’ble Delhi High Court concerning the same type of goods, we see no good reasons to admit these appeals. Besides, the main issue involved before Hon’ble Delhi High Court concerned the interpretation of Notification No.57/2017-Cus dated 30 June 2017. The interpretation put on this Notification by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court has now been accepted by the Customs Authorities. Therefore, these appeals, cannot be said to give rise to any substantial questions of law.

¶30

For the above reasons, we dismiss these appeals without any costs order.

¶31

(Jitendra Jain, J.) (M. S. Sonak, J.)

¶32

Signed by: Sayyed Saeed Ali Designation: PA To Honourable Judge Date: 14/07/2025 11:27:16

¶33

Page 2 of 2

Commissioner of Customs Air Cargo Complex Mumbai v. Ingram Micro India Private Limited

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Commissioner of Customs Air Cargo Complex Mumbai v. Ingram Micro India Private Limited

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Alkyl Amines Chemicals Ltd. vs Union of India

Rama Cylinders Private Limited vs Union of India

L. Chhotalal and Sons vs Union of India

Commissioner of Customs (Preventive ) Mumbai vs Nucleus Securities

Goldstar Power Limited vs Union of India

Nimain Charan Biswal vs Securities and Exchange Board of India (Sebi)