Bombay High Court Allows Appeal in Customs Classification Dispute — Bulk Pet Food Bags Classifiable Under CTH 2309.90.10. The court held that the product 'Pet Food' imported in bulk bags of 20 kgs is classifiable under Customs Tariff Heading 2309.90.10 as 'other preparations of a kind used in animal feeding' and not under CTH 2309.90.90.

High Court: Bombay High Court Bench: BOMBAY
  • 180
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The appellant, M/s. Orange Pet Nutrition Private Limited, filed an appeal under Section 28KA of the Customs Act, 1962, challenging an advance ruling order dated 4 July 2025 passed by the Customs Authority for Advance Ruling (CAAR), Mumbai. The appellant had filed an application on 30 January 2025 seeking an advance ruling on whether their imported products, which were pet food in bulk bags weighing 20 kgs, were classifiable under Customs Tariff Heading (CTH) 2309.90.10 of the First Schedule to the Customs Tariff Act, 1975. The CAAR had ruled against the appellant, classifying the product under CTH 2309.90.90 instead. The High Court considered the nature of the product, which is a preparation for animal feeding, and the specific tariff description under CTH 2309.90.10. The court held that the product clearly falls under CTH 2309.90.10 as 'other preparations of a kind used in animal feeding' and not under the residual heading CTH 2309.90.90. The court allowed the appeal, setting aside the CAAR's order and directing that the product be classified under CTH 2309.90.10.

Headnote

A) Customs Law - Classification of Goods - Advance Ruling - Section 28KA Customs Act, 1962 - The appellant imported pet food in bulk bags of 20 kgs and sought advance ruling on classification under CTH 2309.90.10. The CAAR had classified the product under CTH 2309.90.90. The High Court held that the product is classifiable under CTH 2309.90.10 as 'other preparations of a kind used in animal feeding' based on the nature of the product and the tariff description. (Paras 1-10)

B) Customs Law - Interpretation of Tariff Headings - CTH 2309.90.10 vs CTH 2309.90.90 - The court interpreted the scope of CTH 2309.90.10 which covers 'other preparations of a kind used in animal feeding' and held that pet food in bulk bags falls within this heading as it is a preparation for animal feeding, not a residual item under CTH 2309.90.90. (Paras 5-8)

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the products imported in bulk bags weighing 20 kgs by the Appellant are classifiable under CTH 2309.90.10 of the First Schedule to the Customs Tariff Act, 1975.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The appeal is allowed. The Advance Ruling Order dated 4 July 2025 passed by the Customs Authority for Advance Ruling, Mumbai is set aside. It is held that the products imported in bulk bags weighing 20 kgs by the appellant are classifiable under CTH 2309.90.10 of the First Schedule to the Customs Tariff Act, 1975.

Law Points

  • Customs classification
  • Advance ruling
  • Section 28KA Customs Act 1962
  • CTH 2309.90.10
  • Bulk bags
  • Pet food
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2026 LawText (BOM) (07) 74

Customs Appeal No. 53 of 2025

2026-07-22

B. P. Colabawalla, Firdosh P. Pooniwalla

Mr. Sandeep Sachdeva a/w Ms. Samyuktha Pentyala i/b M/s. Dserve Legal Advocates (for Appellant), Mr. Ram Ochani a/w Ms. Sangeeta Yadav (for Respondents)

M/s. Orange Pet Nutrition Private Limited

Union of India and Ors.

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

Nature of Litigation

Appeal under Section 28KA of the Customs Act, 1962 against an advance ruling order of the Customs Authority for Advance Ruling, Mumbai.

Remedy Sought

The appellant sought a ruling that the imported products (pet food in bulk bags of 20 kgs) are classifiable under CTH 2309.90.10.

Filing Reason

The appellant disagreed with the CAAR's classification of the product under CTH 2309.90.90.

Previous Decisions

The CAAR passed an Advance Ruling Order dated 4 July 2025 classifying the product under CTH 2309.90.90.

Issues

Whether the products imported in bulk bags weighing 20 kgs by the Appellant are classifiable under CTH 2309.90.10 of the First Schedule to the Customs Tariff Act, 1975.

Submissions/Arguments

The appellant argued that the product is pet food, a preparation for animal feeding, and thus falls under CTH 2309.90.10. The respondents argued for classification under CTH 2309.90.90.

Ratio Decidendi

The product 'Pet Food' imported in bulk bags of 20 kgs is a preparation of a kind used in animal feeding and is specifically covered under CTH 2309.90.10, which is not a residual entry. Therefore, it cannot be classified under the residual heading CTH 2309.90.90.

Judgment Excerpts

The present Appeal is filed under Section 28KA of the Customs Act 1962, challenging the Advance Ruling Order dated 4th July 2025 passed by the Customs Authority for Advance Ruling, Mumbai. Whether the products imported in bulk bags weighing 20 kgs. by the Appellant are classifiable under CTH 2309.90.10 of the First Schedule to the Customs Tariff Act, 1975.

Procedural History

On 30 January 2025, the appellant filed an Advance Ruling Application before the CAAR. The CAAR passed an order on 4 July 2025. The appellant then filed the present appeal under Section 28KA of the Customs Act, 1962 before the High Court of Judicature at Bombay. The appeal was reserved on 11 June 2026 and pronounced on 22 July 2026.

Acts & Sections

  • Customs Act, 1962: 28KA
  • Customs Tariff Act, 1975: First Schedule, CTH 2309.90.10, CTH 2309.90.90
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
Supreme Court Supreme Court Dismisses Union's Appeals in Service Matter Regarding Promotion Eligibility After Compassionate Transfer. Past Service Counts as Experience for Promotion Despite Loss of Seniority Under Relevant Service Rules.
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Quashes Disqualification of Joint Venture in Tender for Irrigation Canal Work; Holds Experience Must Be Cumulatively Assessed Without Reduction by Investment Ratio. The court declares that VIDC's assessment of a joint venture's expe...