The Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court has ruled that teak log imports cannot be granted preferential duty exemption under the ASEAN-India Free Trade Agreement (AIFTA) when the supporting certificates of origin are defective and inconsistent.
The Bench of Justice P. Velmurugan and Justice K.K. Ramakrishnan held that the burden lies on the importer to strictly establish eligibility for exemption through valid certificates. Mere matching of shipment details and quantities, the Court said, cannot cure fundamental defects in documentation.
“An invoice issued after the shipment cannot establish the origin of goods already transported, rendering the certificate unreliable,” the Court observed.
The case arose from the import of teak round logs through Tuticorin Port. The importer initially paid customs duty of over Rs. 2.25 crore but later sought exemption under Notification No. 46/2011-Cus., relying on AIFTA certificates that purportedly showed Myanmar Timber Enterprises as the consignor.
The department authorities rejected the claim, citing serious discrepancies. The certificates are named Concorde Commodities (Singapore) instead of the actual third-country supplier, Panasia International Ltd., Dubai. Invoices included in the certificates were dated nearly two months after the goods had already been shipped on March 31, 2014 by the vessel MV Sioux Maiden. Identical invoice numbers used by different entities raised authenticity concerns.
Although the CESTAT later allowed the exemption, the High Court found that the tribunal overlooked material inconsistencies.
Setting aside the tribunal’s order, the Court restored the decisions of the original adjudicating authority and Commissioner (Appeals), which had denied the benefit.
The judgment underscores that AIFTA trade benefits can only be availed when certificates of origin are genuine and fully compliant with prescribed rules, and not on the basis of matching quantities or vessel particulars.
Case Details
Case Title: The Commissioner of Customs Versus M/s.Olam Enterprses India Pvt. Ltd.
Case No.: C.M.A.(MD)No.105 of 2019
Date: 22 / 09 /2025
Counsel For Petitioner: R.Nandakumar
Counsel For Respondent: Joseph Prabakar
