Allowed

M/S. Adrika Health Food Pvt. Ltd. v. Kolkata-Port

CESTAT16 Jan 2026C/76078/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Tribunal addressed an appeal regarding the classification of edible oil consigned from Vietnam. The court set aside the confiscation of goods, the redemption fine, and the penalty imposed by lower authorities, observing that the goods were found to be inedible and the appellant had paid the tax but lacked intent to misdeclare. The court distinguished between accidental misclassification and in

What the court decided

AI extract

M/S. Adrika Health Food Pvt. Ltd. vs Kolkata-Port — Customs and Excise | CESTAT (2026)

¶1

IN THE CUSTOMS, EXCISE AND SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, KOLKATA EASTERN ZONAL BENCH : KOLKATA

¶2

REGIONAL BENCH - COURT NO.2

¶3

Customs Appeal No.76078 of 2023

¶4

(Arising out of Order-in-AppealNo.KOL/CUS(PORT)/KS/662/2023 dated06.09.2023 passed by Commissioner of Customs (Appeals), Kolkata.)

¶5

M/s.Adrika Health Food Pvt. Ltd.

¶6

(12/1, Satyendranath Majumder Sarani, Manohar Pukur Road, Kolkata-700026.)

¶7

…Appellant

¶8

VERSUS

¶9

Commissioner of Customs (Port), Kolkata

¶10

…..Respondent

¶11

(15/1, Strand Road, Custom House, Kolkata-700001.)

¶12

APPEARANCE

¶13

Shri S.K.Mohapatra, Advocate for the Appellant (s) Shri S.Chitkara & Shri S.Debnath, Authorized Representatives for the Revenue

¶14

CORAM:HON’BLE SHRI R. MURALIDHAR, MEMBER(JUDICIAL) HON’BLE SHRI RAJEEV TANDON, MEMBER(TECHNICAL)

¶15

FINAL ORDER NO. 75076/2026

¶16

DATE OF HEARING :16.01.2026 DATE OF DECISION :16.01.2026

¶17

Per :R. MURALIDHAR :

¶18

The Appellant has imported four consignments of edible oil between the period from August 2021 to November 2021 from Vietnam. They have classified the goods as Rice Bran Oil and claimed Customs Duty Exemption. The Customs Department after getting the goods tested, found that the oil is not of edible grade. Subsequently, on representation Food Safety and Standards Authority of India [FASSAI], has given clearance to the Appellant to get hold of the consignments upon giving undertaking that the Oil will be marketed only after proper refining. The lower authorities have confirmed the

¶19

¶20

Customs Appeal No.76078 of 2023

¶21

Customs Duty demand along with interest and penalty. They have also confiscated the goods in question subject to release on payment of the decided Redemption Fine. Being aggrieved by the impugned order, the appellant is before the Tribunal.

¶22

The Ld.Advocate appearing on behalf of the Appellant submits that they were under the bona fide belief that they are classifying the goods correctly under Rice Bran Oil since all the documents like commercial invoice, Bill of Lading, Certificate of Origin etc., were showing the goods as Rice Bran Oil. However, it was pointed out by the Customs that the goods being inedible when it is imported and hence, would not qualify for the duty exemption. The FASSAI also held that the goods can be cleared only when an undertaking is given by the appellant towards marketing the same after refining the imported oil. The Appellants have agreed to the proposal. After this, they have paid the required Customs duty and cleared the goods. The LdCounsel submits that they are not contesting the Customs duty paid along with interest. He is before the Tribunal only praying that the penalty imposed may be set aside and the redemption fine imposed consequent to the confiscation may be set aside. He takes us through to commercial invoices issued in respect of all the four consignments along with the Certificates of Origin to show that the Appellant did not indulge in any mis-declaration which may invite the confiscation and penalty imposed on them. He further submits that without any hesitation, the Appellant has paid the Customs duty demanded along with the interest thereon, which is not being contested by them. In view of these submissions, he prays that the confiscation and consequent redemption fine may be set aside along with the penalties imposed on them.

¶23

The Ld.AR for the Department submits that the Appellant has declared the goods as Rice Bran Oil concealing the fact that this was not refined and hence was not edible. The duty exemption is available only for edible grade oil. Therefore, Customs had to undertake the

¶24

¶25

Customs Appeal No.76078 of 2023

¶26

testing. After the Test Report, it was found that the goods were not edible. Subsequently, the Appellant filed their Appeal before FASSAI, after which conditional clearance by FASSAI was granted, subject to the appellant undertaking to refine the oil before it is marketed. Only after these actions, the Appellant paid the Customs duty. Therefore, these facts show that the charge of mis-declaration can be fastened on the Appellant. Accordingly, he justifies the imposition of redemption fine and penalty on the Appellant.

¶27

Heard both sides and perused the documentary evidence placed before us.

¶28

Sample Copies of the document of one consignment are reproduced below :-

¶29

¶30

Customs Appeal No.76078 of 2023

¶31

¶32

Customs Appeal No.76078 of 2023

¶33

¶34

Customs Appeal No.76078 of 2023

¶35

¶36

Customs Appeal No.76078 of 2023

¶37

¶38

Customs Appeal No.76078 of 2023

¶39

From the above documents, we find that even these documents specify that the goods were not refined. These documents had been submitted by the Appellant along with their Bill of Entry at the time of imports. Therefore, we do not find that the Appellant had any intention to mis-declare the goods. They were simply interpreting the exemption under the Notification and had taken the view that they would be eligible for Nil rate of Customs duty. It is an admitted fact that the Appellant has also paid the demanded Customs duty along with interest which is not being contested by them now. Therefore, we do not see any reason for confiscation of the goods and imposing of penalties on account of mis-declaration.

¶40

It is being made clear that the Customs duty along with interest paid by the Appellant is being held by this Bench to be validly paid by them and as not being contested by them. The Ld.Advocate has also assured the Bench that no claim of refund shall be made by the appellant towards the Customs Duty and Interest already paid by them.

¶41

Considering the specific factual details discussed above, we set aside the confiscation order and consequent redemption fine imposed on them. We also set aside the penalty imposed on the Appellant. The Appeal stands disposed off thus.

¶42

(Dictated and pronounced in the open Court.)

¶43

Sd/ (R. MURALIDHAR) MEMBER (JUDICIAL)

¶44

Sd/ (RAJEEV TANDON) MEMBER (TECHNICAL)

¶45

M/S. Adrika Health Food Pvt. Ltd. v. Kolkata-Port

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

M/S. Adrika Health Food Pvt. Ltd. v. Kolkata-Port

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rahul Singh vs C.C. Lucknow

Navalai Enterprises vs New Delhi

Commissioner of Customs Ludhiana-C vs M/s. Engineers Trio

Hyundai Motor India Ltd. vs Commissioner of Customs - Chennai II (Import Commissionerate)

Dr Mohandhas vs C.C. New Delhi (Import & General)

Siya Traders vs Nhava Sheva -Appeal - v

-Kolkata(Port) vs Rkr Graphite Pvt. Ltd.

-Kolkata(Port) vs Aahana Commerce Pvt. Ltd.