The Mumbai Bench of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has set aside the reclassification of imported “food seasoning material for snack foods,” holding that such products are correctly classifiable under Heading 3302 of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975.
The bench of Justice Dilip Gupta (President) and P. Anjani Kumar (Technical Member) observed that Heading 3302 covers mixtures of odoriferous substances used as raw materials in industries, including the food industry. It noted that the imported goods contained ingredients such as parsley, spearmint, and paprika, which fall within the category of essential oils and oleoresins listed under the relevant tariff heading.
The case involved an appeal filed by M/s. Godavari Udyog against the order of the Commissioner (Appeals), which had upheld the reclassification of the imported goods under Heading 2103 90 40 instead of the originally declared Heading 3302 10 10.
The appellant had imported goods described as “food seasoning material for snack foods” and classified them under Heading 3302, which covers mixtures of odoriferous substances used in industrial applications such as food flavouring. However, based on a test report by the Deputy Chief Chemist, the Revenue sought to reclassify the goods under Heading 2103, treating them as edible preparations like sauces and seasonings.
Subsequently, a show cause notice was issued, and the adjudicating authority confirmed the reclassification, imposed a redemption fine of ₹1.75 lakh, and levied a penalty of ₹25,000. The appellate authority also upheld this decision, prompting the present appeal before the Tribunal.
The imported products consisted of various ingredients such as salt, maltodextrin, garlic powder, onion powder, herbs like parsley and spearmint, paprika oleoresin, and flavouring agents. Laboratory reports described them as food preparations containing flavouring agents, carbohydrates, proteins, and additives, and clarified that they were free from alcohol.
The appellant contended that the authorities had misinterpreted the Harmonised System of Nomenclature (HSN) explanatory notes. It was argued that Heading 3302 does not require odoriferous substances to be the predominant component; rather, the presence of one or more such substances that impart the essential character is sufficient.
The appellant further submitted that ingredients like parsley, spearmint, and paprika—recognized odoriferous substances—conferred the essential character of the product. Reliance was also placed on Rule 3(b) of the General Rules for Interpretation, which mandates classification based on the component that gives the product its essential character.
The Bench held that the lower authorities had erred in concluding that odoriferous substances must be the main or predominant constituent for classification under Heading 3302. The Tribunal clarified that the legal requirement is only that such substances form the basis of the mixture and impart its essential character.
The Bench also relied on earlier decisions, including Symrise Pvt. Ltd. and International Flavours and Fragrances India Pvt. Ltd., which held that mixtures of odoriferous substances—whether natural or synthetic—used in the food industry are classifiable under Heading 3302, even if not directly consumable.
A critical observation made by the Tribunal was that the authorities had misread the HSN explanatory notes by insisting on predominance of odoriferous substances. The Tribunal emphasized that such an interpretation is inconsistent with the tariff structure and classification principles.
Case Details
Case Title: Godavari Udyog Versus Principal Commissioner of Customs – NS I
Citation: JURISHOUR-1024-CES-2026(MUM)
Case No.: Customs Appeal No. 87080 of 2016
Date: 27.04.2026
Counsel For Appellant: Sanjay Singhal, Advocate
Counsel For Respondent: L.B. D’Coasta, Authorised Representative
