CESTAT Rules "Liquid Seaweed Concentrate" as Fertilizer, Not Plant Growth Regulator, Citing Chemical Composition [Read Order]
The tribunal found that the goods contained 28% organic seaweed components and 9.8% Nitrogen, Phosphorus, and Potash, primarily indicating fertilizer characteristics
![CESTAT Rules Liquid Seaweed Concentrate as Fertilizer, Not Plant Growth Regulator, Citing Chemical Composition [Read Order]](https://www.taxscan.in/wp-content/uploads/2025/04/Fertilizer-Not-plant-growth-regulator-CESTAT-Liquid-Seaweed-Concentrate-taxscan.jpg "CESTAT Rules Liquid Seaweed Concentrate as Fertilizer, Not Plant Growth Regulator, Citing Chemical Composition [Read Order]")
The Mumbai Bench of Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) recently ruled that "Liquid Seaweed Concentrate" imported by the assessee should be classified as a fertilizer and not as a plant growth regulator, citing its chemical composition. Excel Crop Care Limited, appellant-assessee, had imported "Liquid Seaweed Concentrate (Crop Plus)" from the USA and filed three...
The Mumbai Bench of Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) recently ruled that "Liquid Seaweed Concentrate" imported by the assessee should be classified as a fertilizer and not as a plant growth regulator, citing its chemical composition.
Excel Crop Care Limited, appellant-assessee, had imported "Liquid Seaweed Concentrate (Crop Plus)" from the USA and filed three Bills of Entry, classifying the goods under CTI 3101 0099. The goods were self-assessed, duty was paid, and they were cleared for home consumption.
Later, during a post-audit, the Department found that the goods should have been classified under CTI 3809 9340, making the concessional duty rate unavailable. A show-cause notice dated 19.05.2017 was issued to demand differential duty.
What’s changed in TDS for 2025? - Click Here
The Additional Commissioner of Customs, through an order dated 28.01.2020, upheld the reclassification, confirmed the duty demand with interest, and imposed a penalty. The assessee’s appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) was rejected on 31.03.2022. Aggrieved, the assessee filed the present appeal before the tribunal.
The two member bench comprising S.K.Mohanty(Judicial Member) and M.M.Parthiban(Technical Member) examined the case records and found that the Show-Cause Notice dated 19.05.2017 proposed reclassifying the imported goods as "Plant Growth Regulator" under CTI 3808 9340, but did not clearly explain why the original classification under CTI 3101 0099 was wrong.
The appellate tribunal noted that the goods contained 28% organic components from seaweed and 9.8% Nitrogen, Phosphorus, and Potash, based on the certificate of analysis. Since most of the goods' composition related to fertilizers, they could not be treated as plant growth regulators.
What’s changed in TDS for 2025? - Click Here
The CESTAT also referred to a Larger Bench decision, which clarified that fertilizers provide nutrients for plant growth, while plant growth regulators influence specific plant processes.
Relying on the chemical analysis and the Larger Bench ruling, the tribunal held that the goods were fertilizers and not plant growth regulators. It found no merit in the reclassification and the resultant demand, and set aside the impugned order.
In short,the appeal was allowed.
To Read the full text of the Order CLICK HERE
Support our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates
