Supreme Court Allows Appeal in Customs Duty Exemption Case — Crude Degummed Soyabean Oil Not an Agricultural Product Under Notification No. 53/2003-Cus. Nexus Between Imported and Exported Products Established Under DFCE Scheme.

  • 11
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The appellant, Noble Resources and Trading India Private Limited (formerly Andagro Services Pvt. Ltd.), a government-recognized two-star export house, imported crude degummed soyabean oil under the Duty Free Credit Entitlement (DFCE) scheme of the EXIM Policy 2002-2007, claiming exemption from customs duty under Notification No. 53/2003-Cus. dated 01.04.2003. The Revenue issued a show-cause notice on 30.08.2006, contending that the imported oil was an agricultural product excluded from exemption, and that there was no nexus between the imported oil and the exported products (soyabean meal extract, etc.). The Assistant Commissioner confirmed the demand of Rs. 1,00,38,321/- on 09.01.2007. The appellant challenged this before the Gujarat High Court, which dismissed the writ petition on 05.08.2019. The Supreme Court granted special leave and heard the appeal. The core legal issues were: (1) whether crude degummed soyabean oil is an 'agricultural product' excluded under the notification; (2) whether the departmental circular could expand the exclusion; and (3) whether the imported product had nexus with the exported product. The appellant argued that the oil is not an agricultural product as it undergoes manufacture, and the circular cannot override the statutory notification. The Revenue argued that the oil is derived from soyabean, an agricultural product, and thus excluded. The Supreme Court held that crude degummed soyabean oil is not an agricultural product; it is a manufactured commodity. The circular could not enlarge the exclusion. The nexus requirement was satisfied as both products are food products. The Court allowed the appeal, setting aside the demand and the High Court's judgment.

Headnote

A) Customs Law - Duty Free Credit Entitlement (DFCE) Scheme - Exemption from Customs Duty - Notification No. 53/2003-Cus. dated 01.04.2003 - The appellant imported crude degummed soyabean oil claiming exemption under the DFCE scheme. The Revenue denied exemption on the ground that the imported oil was an agricultural product excluded under the notification. The Supreme Court held that crude degummed soyabean oil is not an agricultural product as it undergoes a manufacturing process and is a distinct marketable commodity. The circular No. 10/2004-Cus. could not expand the exclusion beyond the statutory notification. (Paras 13-13.1)

B) Customs Law - Nexus Requirement - DFCE Scheme - The appellant exported food products like soyabean meal extract and imported crude degummed soyabean oil. The Court held that both are food products under category '67/food products', establishing the required nexus. The DGFT public notice allowed import of edible oils through MMTC, which the appellant complied with. (Paras 13.5-13.6)

C) Customs Law - Manufacture Test - Central Excise Act, 1944 - The process of extracting crude degummed soyabean oil from soyabean amounts to manufacture, resulting in a distinct commodity. Therefore, the imported oil is not an agricultural product. (Para 13.4)

D) Customs Law - Circular Cannot Override Notification - Departmental Circular No. 10/2004-Cus. dated 30.01.2004 - The circular expanded the exclusion to 'any product derived from agricultural origin', which went beyond the statutory notification. The High Court erred in relying on the circular. (Paras 13-13.1)

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether crude degummed soyabean oil is an 'agricultural product' excluded from exemption under Notification No. 53/2003-Cus. dated 01.04.2003, and whether the imported product has nexus with the exported product under the DFCE scheme.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, set aside the order of the Assistant Commissioner dated 09.01.2007 and the judgment of the Gujarat High Court dated 05.08.2019. The demand of duty of Rs. 1,00,38,321/- was quashed. The appellant was held entitled to the benefit of the DFCE scheme.

Law Points

  • Customs duty exemption
  • Duty Free Credit Entitlement (DFCE) scheme
  • Agricultural product definition
  • Circular cannot override statutory notification
  • Nexus requirement
  • Manufacture test
  • Common parlance test
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2025 INSC 684

Civil Appeal No. 2572 of 2025

2025-04-08

Ujjal Bhuyan

2025 INSC 684

Noble Resources and Trading India Private Limited (Earlier known as Andagro Services Pvt. Ltd.)

Union of India & Ors.

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Civil appeal against High Court judgment upholding customs duty demand under DFCE scheme.

Remedy Sought

Appellant sought exemption from customs duty on import of crude degummed soyabean oil under DFCE scheme.

Filing Reason

Revenue denied exemption claiming imported oil is agricultural product and no nexus with exported product.

Previous Decisions

Assistant Commissioner confirmed duty demand of Rs. 1,00,38,321/- on 09.01.2007; Gujarat High Court dismissed writ petition on 05.08.2019.

Issues

Whether crude degummed soyabean oil is an 'agricultural product' excluded from exemption under Notification No. 53/2003-Cus. Whether departmental circular No. 10/2004-Cus. could expand the exclusion beyond the statutory notification. Whether the imported product has nexus with the exported product under the DFCE scheme.

Submissions/Arguments

Appellant: Crude degummed soyabean oil is not an agricultural product; it is a manufactured commodity. Circular cannot override statutory notification. Nexus exists as both are food products. Import through MMTC is permissible. Respondent: The oil is derived from soyabean, an agricultural product, and thus excluded. No nexus between imported oil and exported soyabean meal extract.

Ratio Decidendi

Crude degummed soyabean oil is not an agricultural product under Notification No. 53/2003-Cus. as it undergoes a manufacturing process and is a distinct commodity. A departmental circular cannot expand the exclusionary clause of a statutory notification. The nexus requirement under the DFCE scheme is satisfied when both imported and exported products fall under the same product group (food products).

Judgment Excerpts

The circular could not have narrowed down the scope of the exemption by enlarging the exclusionary clause. Through a manufacturing process, a distinct commodity or product is manufactured i.e. crude degummed soyabean oil which is clearly a distinct commodity.

Procedural History

Show-cause notice dated 30.08.2006 -> Reply dated 14.09.2006 -> Personal hearing on 08.12.2006 -> Order-in-original dated 09.01.2007 confirming demand -> Writ petition before Gujarat High Court (R/Special Civil Application No.8596 of 2007) -> High Court dismissed petition on 05.08.2019 -> Supreme Court granted special leave on 06.12.2019 and allowed appeal on 08.04.2025.

Acts & Sections

  • Central Excise Act, 1944:
  • Constitution of India: Article 226
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
Supreme Court Supreme Court Allows Appeal in Customs Duty Exemption Case — Crude Degummed Soyabean Oil Not an Agricultural Product Under Notification No. 53/2003-Cus. Nexus Between Imported and Exported Products Established Under DFCE Scheme.
Related Judgement
High Court Petitioner Granted Compensation in Lieu of Regularization After 41 Years of Service as Part-time Sweeper.  Bombay High Court grants Rs. 7,50,000/- compensation to a petitioner who served for over four decades without pensionary benefits.