Partly allowed

Vandana Trading Company v. Customs (P) Jamnagar

CESTAT24 Apr 2026C/10305/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Tribunal allowed the appeal partly. It held that imported Roasted Areca Nuts, certified fit for human consumption with insect damage within limits, must be released forthwith to prevent deterioration from continued detention, despite the Department's request for a new test due to the borderline result.

What did the court decide?

Goods allowed to be released forthwith within two weeks of the date of receipt of the order, subject to furnishing requisite documents and potentially providing a bond.

Vandana Trading Company vs Customs (P) Jamnagar — CESTAT (2026) — LawSathi Research

¶1

Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal West Zonal Bench at Ahmedabad REGIONAL BENCH-COURT NO.1

¶2

Customs Appeal No. 10305 of 2026-SM

¶3

(Arising out of Order in Original CUS/SIIB/INT/247/2026-Prev-O/o Commr-Cus-Prev-Jamn dated 08.04.2026 passed by the Commissioner of Customs (Preventive), Jamnagar)

¶4

VANDANA TRADING COMPANY ……..Appellant

¶5

Near Deepak Plywood, Durga Colony, Rampura Road, Ward No. 21, Sikar, Rajasthan, 332001.

¶6

VERSUS

¶7

Commissioner of CUSTOMS – Customs (P) Jamnagar …….Respondent

¶8

Office of the Commissioner of Customs (Preventive), Seema Shulk Bhavan, Jamnagar - Rajkot Highway, Near Victoria Bridge, Jamnagar-- 361001, Gujarat

¶9

APPEARANCE:

¶10

Shri Manish Jain, Ms. Raksha Bhandari and Ms. Surbhi Chandani Advocates for the Appellant

¶11

Smt. Sunita Menon, Superintendent(AR) for the Respondent

¶12

CORAM:

¶13

HON'BLE SOMESH ARORA, MEMBER ( JUDICIAL)

¶14

Final Order No. 10312/2026

¶15

DATE OF HEARING/ DECISION: 24.04.2026

¶16

SOMESH ARORA

¶17

In the instant case, the imported goods are Roasted Areca Nuts, which were declared to be fit for human consumption. The goods were subjected to testing and the test report also favoured the appellant, indicating that the damage by insects was 2.9%, which is within the permissible limit of 3% under the relevant regulations, thereby certifying the goods as fit for human consumption. However, the Department, on its own, conducted a re-test on the ground that the reported damage of 2.9% was very close to the permissible limit. The learned Advocate submits that the Department’s own test report is in favour of the appellant and there was no justification for retesting.

¶18

The learned Authorised Representative was specifically asked as to the reason for undertaking suo motu re-testing despite the report being favourable. It was submitted that the re-test was conducted as the case was borderline.

¶19

On consideration, even if the submission of the Department is accepted, there appears to be no valid justification for continued detention of the goods.

¶20

C/10305/2026-SM

¶21

¶22

The Department is at liberty to retain samples, if necessary, and allow clearance of the goods without delay. Any further retention at the port would only result in further deterioration due to insect infestation, ultimately rendering the goods unfit for human consumption, which cannot be permitted on account of administrative delay.

¶23

Accordingly, the goods deserve to be released forthwith. However, by way of abundant caution, the Department may take a bond from the appellant. The goods shall be released within two weeks from the date of receipt of this order, subject to the appellant furnishing the requisite documents.

¶24

The appeal is partly allowed.

¶25

(Dictated and pronounced in the open court)

¶26

(SOMESH ARORA) MEMBER ( JUDICIAL )

¶27

Bharvi

Vandana Trading Company v. Customs (P) Jamnagar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vandana Trading Company v. Customs (P) Jamnagar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Vasko Steel Private Limited vs Mundra Customs

Vasko Metalloys Private Limited vs Mundra Customs

Vinaye Jain vs Mundra Customs

Vinaye Jain vs Mundra Customs

C Mahendra Exports Ltd. vs Ahmedabad

-Commissioner of Customs(Import)-Mumbai(Air Cargo Import) vs Brightstar Telecommunications India Ltd.

Avery Dennison India Pvt. Ltd. vs Commissioner of Customs-Nhava Sheva - II

Goa vs M/s Blueglobe Exports Private Limited