M/S.S.M.Mohammed Ibrahim vs. Additional Commissioner

Facts

The appellant, M/s.S.M.Mohammed Ibrahim & Co. Pvt. Ltd., challenged an order dated 24.10.2024 passed by the Assistant Commissioner of GST & Central Excise. The appellant sought to reclassify their product, unmanufactured tobacco, under heading 2401 20 90 of the Customs Tariff. The appellant argued that this classification should be based on the nature and process adopted, relevant HSN explanatory notes, and judicial pronouncements. The writ appeal was filed against the order of the learned Single Judge in the writ petition.

Held

The Court set aside the order impugned in the writ petition and the order of the learned Single Judge assailed in the writ appeal. The Court held that as long as the appellant's activities are confined to what was approved in the Pachiappa Chettiar case, their product would fall under CETH 2401 20 90. The writ petition and the writ appeal were consequently allowed. The operative direction was to allow the writ appeal and reclassify the appellant's product. The specific reasoning from the Pachiappa Chettiar case was not detailed in the provided judgment excerpt, but it formed the basis for the Court's decision regarding the classification of unmanufactured tobacco.

Key Issues

1. Whether the appellant's product, unmanufactured tobacco, should be classified under heading 2401 20 90 of the Customs Tariff, considering its nature, processing, HSN explanatory notes, and judicial precedents? The appellant contended that their product, unmanufactured tobacco, should be classified under heading 2401 20 90 of the Customs Tariff. They argued that this classification should be determined by the nature and process of their activity, supported by relevant HSN explanatory notes and prior judicial pronouncements. The respondent, the Additional Commissioner of GST & Central Excise, did not present any arguments in the judgment provided.