M/S GOURISHANKAR POLYMER INDUSTRIES vs COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS

Judgment text excerpt

$~13 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision: 20th March, 2025 + CUSAA 48/2025 & CM APPL. 11174/2025 M/S GOURISHANKAR POLYMER INDUSTRIES .....Appellant Through: Mr. Prashant Srivastava, Advocate. versus COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS .....Respondent Through: Mr. Aakarsh Srivastava, Standing Counsel. CORAM: JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH JUSTICE RAJNEESH KUMAR GUPTA PrathibaM. Singh, J. (Oral) 1. This hearing has been done through hybrid mode. 2. The present appeal has been filed by the Appellant under Section 130 of the Customs Act, 1962 seeking to set aside the order dated 8th November 2024 passed by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (hereinafter, ‘CESTAT’), Principal Bench at New Delhi. 3. It is submitted by Mr. Aakarsh Srivastava, ld. Standing Counsel for the Respondent that though the monetary limit is below Rs.50,00,000/-, the classification of the product would be a recurring and a legal issue and hencein terms of exception in Clause 2(c) of the‘Instruction’ dated 2nd November 2011, the issue deserves to be considered. The said clause in the Instruction reads as under : CUSAA 48/2025 Page 1 of 3 Signature Not Verified Signed By:MANJEET KAUR Signing Date:24.03.2025 18:33:51 “2. Adverse judgments relating to the following should be contested irrespective of the amount involved: a) Where the constitutional validity of the provisions of an Act or Rule is under challenge; b) Where Notification/ Instruction/ Order or Circular has been held illegal or ultra vires; c) Classification and refund issues which are of legal and/ or recurring nature.” 4. Ld. Counsel for the Petitioner relies upon the order dated 14th November 2024 in Customs Appeal No. 41243/ 2015 passed by CESTAT, Chennai wherein the same product was involved i.e., PVC Resin Grade S