Customs must release FSSAI-cleared food imports without insisting on a bank guarantee.

The petitioner imported two consignments of roasted arecanut splits (betel nuts) under Bills of Entry Nos. 8347475 and 8347647 on 28 March 2026.

Samples were drawn and sent to the Food Safety and Standards Authority of India (FSSAI), which issued a No-Objection Certificate on 10 April 2026, certifying conformity with the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006 and permitting release of the goods.

Despite the NOC, the goods were not released, leading the petitioner to file the writ petition on 23 April 2026.

During the pendency of the petition, the samples were sent to the Central Revenue Control Laboratory (CRCL), which reported moisture content of 6.8% and 6.9% on 5 May 2026. The goods were thereafter seized on 19 May 2026.

By order dated 22 June 2026, provisional release was permitted upon execution of a bond and furnishing of a bank guarantee of ₹40,00,000. The petitioner challenged the seizure memo and the bank-guarantee condition.

The respondents contended that the FSSAI NOC concerned food-safety compliance and did not conclude the issue of tariff classification or Customs-law compliance; they consequently defended the seizure and security requirement.

Whether the Customs authorities could continue to withhold/seize the imported roasted arecanuts and subject their release to a ₹40,00,000 bank guarantee after FSSAI had tested the goods and issued a NOC permitting their release.

Whether the Customs authorities were justified in relying upon a subsequent CRCL examination to question or reclassify goods already found compliant by the competent FSSAI process.

The Court applied the statutory and administrative framework governing food-import clearance under the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006 and the FSSAI Food Import Manual, under which imported food samples are tested by notified laboratories and a conclusive opinion of conformity or non-conformity is issued before an NOC and release.

It relied principally on NBG International Pvt. Ltd. v. Union of India & Ors., 2026 (3) TMI 1212, which followed Make Index Impex v. Union of India & Ors., 2023 SCC OnLine Bom 1678, holding that once FSSAI records that imported goods are not harmful for human consumption and conform to applicable standards, the Customs Department cannot adopt a contrary position so as to prevent release.

The Court also noted that the Customs authorities’ power to verify declarations, reassess goods and investigate under the Customs Act, 1962 and Customs Tariff Act, 1975 does not justify disregarding a conclusive FSSAI clearance on food-safety compliance in the circumstances of the case.

The Court held that the issue was squarely covered by NBG International.

FSSAI had undertaken the prescribed laboratory process and issued a NOC stating that the goods conformed to the applicable food-safety requirements.

The subsequent CRCL reports concerning moisture content could not provide a sound basis for withholding release or imposing a substantial bank guarantee when the competent food-safety authority had already issued a conclusive clearance.

The Court further relied on the Food Import Manual’s procedure, which requires testing by notified laboratories and a conclusive conformity opinion before release, and concluded that a further “window for reclassification” of the goods was unsustainable on the facts.

Accordingly, the seizure and the bank-guarantee condition were found inconsistent with the applicable legal position.

The seizure memo dated 19 May 2026 was quashed and set aside, while the order dated 22 June 2026 was quashed to the extent that it required a ₹40,00,000 security deposit or bank guarantee.

Respondent No. 5 was directed to release the goods forthwith without insisting upon a bank guarantee.

Before dealing with the goods in the open market, the petitioner was directed to obtain a fresh Certificate of Fitness from FSSAI, since the goods had remained with the respondents since March 2026.

No order was made as to costs.