Writ Court Can’t Classify Products Under Customs Tariff Act, Technical Analysis Is Required: Calcutta High Court

The Calcutta High Court has held that a writ court cannot answer the classification of products under the Customs Tariff Act as it requires technical analysis.

The single bench of Justice Md. Nizamuddin has observed that a writ court in the exercise of its constitutional writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India should not act as an expert to scrutinize the composition and mode of manufacture of a product and do the job of classifying a product as to under which classification list of the Customs Tariff Act the product falls since it requires scientific and technical analysis to be conducted by experts in scientific and technical fields.

The petitioner sought a decision on which chapter and classification of the Customs and Central Excise Tariff Act applied to its product. The petitioner has challenged the findings of the Appellate Authority in its order, where it has been held that the petitioner’s claim on PPSB bed sheets is produced in a finished stage by processing the non-woven fabrics manufactured by the petitioner. The Appellate Authority found that the petitioner does not consume PP granules directly in the manufacturing of bed sheets, instead using non-woven fabric in the manufacturing of PP granules, which are used in the manufacturing of PPSB bed sheets.

The petitioner has declared that its product should be under the classification list in Chapter 63 of the Customs Tariff Act and HSN Code 63041930, and the petitioner submitted 5% of GST on its sale in its return.

The claim of the petitioner was accepted by the Appellate Authority by holding that under the Customs and Central Excise Tariff Act, the articles in question are covered under Chapters 56–62 and are not covered under Chapter 63, and it also held that "Non-woven Fabric" and "PSB Bed Sheet" manufactured of non-woven fabric are the same textile fabric. Therefore, the bed sheet manufactured by the petitioner should be considered in Chapter 56, Section 03, at par with "non-woven fabric" and to be taxed at the rate of 12%.

The court noted that only scientific and technical expertise can give any opinion as to the nature of the material used and the method of manufacturing involved in the production of the articles in question, and after taking these aspects into consideration, the appropriate authority under the law can come to a conclusion and make the declaration as to under which heading of the classification list the product in question will fall.

"I am of the considered view that this is not a case where any violation of principles of natural justice has been committed, any procedural irregularity has been committed by the authority in passing the impugned order, or a violation of any specific statutory provision of law has been committed by the Appellate Authority concerned in passing the impugned order," the court said.

Case Title: M/s Harsh Polyfabric Versus UOI

Citation: WPO No. 588 of 2019

Date: 10.01.2023

Counsel For Petitioner: Advocate Rahul Tangri

Counsel For Respondent: Advocate Sovan Mukherjee

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Cal) 18 

Click Here To Read The Order