[Cites 2, Cited by 0]
Calcutta High Court
Commissioner Of Customs Preventive ... vs M/S Neelkanth Mahadev International on 19 February, 2026
Author: Rajarshi Bharadwaj
Bench: Rajarshi Bharadwaj
OD 20, 21, 22, 24, 25 & 26
ORDER SHEET
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
SPECIAL JURISDICTION
ORIGINAL SIDE
CUSTA/90/2025
IA NO: GA/1/2025, GA/2/2025
COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS PREVENTIVE KOLKATA
VS
M/S NEELKANTH MAHADEV INTERNATIONAL
CUSTA/91/2025
IA NO: GA/1/2025, GA/2/2025
COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS PREVENTIVE KOLKATA
VS
SHRI RAJ KUMAR AGARWAL PARTNER
CUSTA/92/2025
IA NO: GA/1/2025, GA/2/2025
COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS PREVENTIVE KOLKATA
VS
SHRI RAJ KUMAR AGARWAL
CUSTA/94/2025
IA NO: GA/1/2025, GA/2/2025
COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS PREVENTIVE KOLKATA
VS
M/S NEELKANTH MAHADEV
CUSTA/95/2025
IA NO: GA/1/2025, GA/2/2025
COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS PREVENTIVE KOLKATA
VS
SHRI ANIL PAHARIYA PARTNER
CUSTA/96/2025
IA NO: GA/1/2025, GA/2/2025
COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS PREVENTIVE KOLKATA
VS
SHRI ANIL PAHARIA PARTNER
2
BEFORE:
The Hon'ble JUSTICE RAJARSHI BHARADWAJ
AND
The Hon'ble JUSTICE UDAY KUMAR
Date: 19th February, 2026.
Appearance:
Mr. Bhaskar Prosad Banerjee, Adv.
Mr. Kaustuv Kanti Maiti, Adv.
...for the appellant
Mr. Saurabh Bagaria, Adv.
Mr. Pranav Sharma, Adv.
Mr. Arka Biswas, Adv.
...for the respondent
The Court: We have heard learned advocates on either side.
There is a delay of 38 days in filing the above appeals. We are satisfied
with the explanation offered for not preferring the appeals within time.
Therefore, the delay is condoned. The applications, all being GA 1 of 2025 filed
in the above appeals are allowed
The above appeals are admitted on the following substantial questions of
law for consideration.
"I) Whether the Learned Tribunal erred in law and fact in not
considering the notification No.99/2011-Cus dated 09.11.2011,
which is binding upon the Customs, which stipulates regarding
claiming exemption of duty the importer have to prove that the
goods, in respect of which the benefit SAFTA exemption is claimed,
are of the origin of the country named mentioned above in
accordance with SAFTA and the present COO SAFTA certificates of
the Respondent are incomplete and deficient and not legal as per the
above notification and hence the said certificate does not possess the
legality to claim exemption from the Customs and as such the
findings of the Learned Tribunal cannot be sustained in law.
II) When the onus to claim preferential treatment under SAFTA
agreement for Refined Palm Olein is subject to fulfilling the criteria of
minimum of DVA of 30% in addition to the condition, that none of
the non-originating inputs from which it is manufactured should fall
under the same CTSH, and by non-mentioning the value of the non-
originating materials expressed as a percentage of the FOB, the
issuing authority, Bangladesh did not comply with Article 8 read
with Article 21(II)(b) of Operational Certificate Procedure for SAFTA
Rules of Origin and hence the COO SAFTA certificate is invalid, non-
enforceable in law and not entitled to claim exemption from payment
of duty, and as such the order of the Learned Tribunal cannot be
sustained.
III) Whether the Learned Tribunal have committed manifest error in
law and fact, an error apparent on the face of the records and also
against the principles of natural justice, since the Learned Tribunal
had taken into consideration additional documents from the
Respondents to sustain the validity of the COO SAFTA certificate by
substituting its own views, when the additional documents have
been privately issued, not part of the adjudication process and have
not been authenticated by the recognized authority under the SAFTA
agreement, and the inclusion of additional documents to sustain the
legality of the COO SAFTA certificate is not recognized in law and not
in terms of the notification NO.99/2011-Cus dated 09.11.2011 and
as such the findings of the Learned Tribunal is not sustainable in
law."
The appellant shall file requisite number of informal paper books prepared
out of Court including therein all relevant materials used before the learned
Court below within ten days from date and serve copies thereof upon the learned
advocate for the respondent.
Settlement of index and all other formalities are dispensed with.
Since the respondent is represented, service of notice of appeal stands
dispensed with.
Let the matter be listed on 10th March, 2026 under the heading 'To Be
Mentioned'.
The applications, all being IA No.GA/2/2025 filed in all the appeals are
disposed of.
(RAJARSHI BHARADWAJ, J.)
(UDAY KUMAR, J.)
B.Pal
