47-wp 13049-25.doc IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 13049 OF 2025 Acadian Seaplants India Pvt. Ltd. … Petitioner Versus Union of India & Ors. ... Respondents __________________________ Mr. Prakash Shah, Senior Advocate a/w. Mr. Vinay Ansurkar, Mrs. Raika Chaudhari, Mr. Yash Dethe i/b Mr. Kartik Vig for the Petitioner. Adv. M. P. Sharma a/w. Ms. Kavita Shukla for Respondent Nos.1 & 2. __________________________ CORAM : M. S. KARNIK AND SANDESH D. PATIL, JJ. DATED : 7 th SEPTEMBER, 2026. P.C. : 1. Heard Mr. Shah, learned Senior Advocate for the petitioner. 2. The challenge in this petition is to the Order-in-Original dated 27th March, 2025 passed by the Commissioner of the Commissioner of Customs. Learned Senior Advocate for the petitioner submitted that the basis for passing of the adjudication order regarding classification dispute is the Analytics Report dated 15th September, 2022 issued by the Additional Director General, Amk 1/4 ARJUN MACHHINDRA KADAM Digitally signed by ARJUN MACHHINDRA KADAM Date: 2026.09.08 16:34:05 +0530 47-wp 13049-25.doc Mumbai on the issue “Mis-classification of “Seaweeds” under CTIs 31010010 & 31010099 instead of correct classification under CTIs 12122110 or 12122910 to evade higher BCD”, data pertaining to imports made”. 3. Learned counsel for the respondents submitted in fact there is no breach of the principles of natural justice as all materials were furnished to the petitioner and all adequate knowledge of the case which the petitioner had to meet. Reference is made to para A.1 of the Affidavit-in-Reply which reads thus:- “Para A.1- As far as the contention of the Petitioner regarding the non-furnishing of the Analytics Report No. 24/022-23 dated 15.09.2022 is concerned, it is submitted that the Show Cause Notice dated 30.03.2023 was issued based on detailed intelligence and data analysis compiled by the DGARM-NCTC, Mumbai. The parameters, entries, and the core findings of the report were sufficiently extracted and discussed within the body of the SCN giving the Petitioner a comprehensive opportunity to meet the allegations. The Respondent No. 2 has adhered strictly to the Principles of Natural Justice, providing regular personal hearings and evaluating all documentary evidences presented. Thus, there is no Amk 2/4 47-wp 13049-25.doc violation of natural justice, and the order is perfectly valid.” 4. There is no dispute that the Analytics Report dated 15th September, 2022 on the basis of which the impugned order was passed was not furnished to the petitioner. It has only stated by the adjudicating authority that the parameters, entries, and the core findings of the report were sufficiently extracted and discussed within the body of the show cause notice giving the Petitioner a comprehensive opportunity to meet the allegations. This according to us does not meet the requirements of following the principles of natural justice as it is the Analytics Report dated 15th September, 2022 which is relied upon should have been furnished to the petitioner considering that the dispute was regarding classification of BCD under the CTIs mentioned hereinabove. 5. The impugned order is therefore set aside. The matter is remitted back to the adjudicating authority for a fresh consideration and for passing the fresh adjudication order on its own merits and in accordance with law. Copy of the Analytics Report and documents relied upon in the show cause notice be furnished to the petitioner. 6. The petitioner shall appear before the adjudicating Amk 3/4 47-wp 13049-25.doc authority on 22nd September, 2026 at 11.00 a.m. when the adjudicating authority may proceed with the hearing as per his convenience preferably within a period of eight weeks from that date. 7. The writ petition is disposed of. (SANDESH D. PATIL, J.) (M. S. KARNIK, J.) Amk 4/4