Madras HC directs DRI to Decide Whether ‘Vital Wheat Gluten’ is covered by DFIA for Wheat Flour [Read Order]

In a recent ruling, the Madras High Court directed the Directorate of RevenueIntelligence to decide whether the product “vital wheat gluten” imported by Bhansali Chematics Private Limited is covered under the Duty Free Import Authorization issued for “wheat flour,” and restrained the authorities from seizing the perishable goods until a final decision is taken.

Bhansali Chematics Private Limited, the petitioner, filed a writ petition before the Madras High Court challenging a mahazar dated 17 November 2025 issued by the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence.

Under the impugned mahazar, the authorities took the view that the Duty Free Import Authorization obtained by the petitioner for import of wheat flour could not be extended to the product imported by it, namely “vital wheat gluten.”

The petitioner had imported the goods under DFIA No. 3411005881 dated 30 December 2024, which permitted duty-free import of wheat flour. The petitioner’s counsel argued that “vital wheat gluten” and “wheat flour” are treated as the same product for the purpose of customs classification and duty exemption.

Your Guide to GST Tariffs & Exemptions. Click here 

The petitioner further argued that the impugned mahazar was issued without jurisdiction and without proper application of mind. They submitted that the goods are perishable in nature and continued detention would cause serious loss. They also pointed out that despite meeting the authorities on several occasions after the issuance of the mahazar, no final decision had been taken.

The respondents, through their counsel, argued that no prejudice would be caused to the petitioner if it participated in the enquiry proceedings initiated pursuant to the summons issued by the authorities. They argued that the petitioner could submit its explanation and a final decision would be taken by the department after considering the same on merits and in accordance with law. The respondents also sought time to file a counter-affidavit.

The single-judge bench comprising Justice Abdul Quddhose observed that the central issue in the case was whether “vital wheat gluten” and “wheat flour” could be treated as the same product for the purpose of duty-free import under the DFIA.

The court observed that the petitioner’s stand was supported by several judicial precedents placed on record. The court also observed that the goods were perishable in nature and that the writ petition had been pending for some time without a counter being filed by the respondents.

The court disposed of the writ petition by directing the first respondent to grant a personal hearing to the petitioner, consider the explanation and the judicial precedents relied upon, and pass a final order within one week thereafter. The court also directed that if the petitioner’s contentions are accepted, the goods must be released without delay.

Until the final order was passed, the respondents were restrained from seizing the goods. The writ petition was disposed of without costs and the matter was posted for reporting compliance.

Support our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates