2025:BHC-OS:22711-DB IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY VINA ARVIND KHADPE ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION Digitally signed by VINA ARVIND KHADPE INTERIM APPLICATION (L) NO.35912 OF 2025 Date: 2025.11.28

18:17:27 +0530 (INTERIM APPLICATION FOR RECTIFICATION OF ERROR)

IN CUSTOM APPEAL NO.56 OF 2025 Roche Diabetes Care India Private Limited .. Applicant (Orig. Appellant)

IN THE MATTER OF :

Roche Diabetes Care India Private Limited .. Appellant Versus The Principal Commissioner of Customs, Air Cargo, New Customs House, Chennai-VII, Commissionerate & ors. .. Respondents Mr. Sriram Sridharan , with Mr. Akshay Deokule, Advocates for the Applicant/Appellant.

Mr. Siddharth Chandrashekhar, Advocate for the Respondents.

CORAM: B. P. COLABAWALLA &

AMIT S. JAMSANDEKAR, JJ.

DATE: NOVEMBER 26, 2025 P. C.

1. The above Application is filed for speaking to the minutes of order dated 1^st October, 2025, passed in Interim Application (L) No.10369 of 2025.

2. Mr. Sridharan, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Appellant, submitted that there is mistake in the rates mentioned in paragraph Nos. 5, 8, 10 and 12 of the said order. He fairly stated that this mistake is due to the fact that the wrong rates were mentioned to the Court while dictating the said order.

3. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Revenue does not dispute the aforesaid position.

4. Considering this factual situation, we direct that :-

(i) in paragraph 5 of the said order, for the figure “5%”, the word “NIL” shall be substituted. Again in paragraph 5 of the said order, the figure “7.5%”, shall be substituted with the figure “5%”;

(ii) in paragraph 8 of the said order, the figure “7.5%”, shall be substituted with the figure “5%”;

(iii) in paragraph 10 of the said order, the figure “2.5%”, shall be substituted with the figure “5%”;

(iv) in paragraph 12 of the said order, for the figure “5%”, the word “NIL” shall be substituted, and the figure “2.5%”, shall be substituted with the figure “5%”.

5. No other correction is sought. The correction shall be carried out in the original order as well as in the copy uploaded on the server.

6. The above Interim Application is disposed of in the aforesaid terms.

However, there shall be no order as to costs.

Assistant of this Court. All concerned will act on production by fax or email of a digitally signed copy of this order.

[ AMIT S. JAMSANDEKAR , J.] [B. P. COLABAWALLA, J.] For the sake of convenience the order dated 1^st October, 2025 (as corrected) is reproduced hereunder:-

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INTERIM APPLICATION (L) No. 10369 OF 2025 IN CUSTOMS APPEAL (ST) NO. 10251 OF 2025 WITH CUSTOMS APPEAL (ST) NO. 10251 OF 2025 Roche Diabetes Care India Private Limited .. Appellant/Applicant Versus The Principal Commissioner of Customs, Air Cargo, New Customs House, Chennai-VII, Commissionerate & Ors .. Respondents Mr. Sriram Shridharan, a/w Mr. Akshay Deokule, Advocates for the Applicant/Appellant.

Mr. Siddharth S. Chandrashekhar, Advocate for the Respondents.

CORAM: B. P. COLABAWALLA &

AMIT S. JAMSANDEKAR, JJ.

DATE: OCTOBER 1, 2025 P. C.

1. Customs Appeal (st) No. 10251 of 2025 is not on Board. Taken on Board.

2. The above Appeal is filed challenging the order passed by Respondent No. 3 under Section 28KA of the Customs Act, 1962. According to the Appellant, though this is a full fledged Appeal, the impugned order dated 2^nd January 2025 gives rise to the following substantial questions of law :-

“(a)Whether, in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Glucometers are correctly classifiable under the Heading 9027 and not under Heading 9018 of the First Schedule of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 ?

(b) Whether, in the facts and circumstances of the case, given that the very same issue on merits has been decided by the Tribunal in Bayer Pharmaceuticals Pvt Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Customs, Mumbai [2016 (331) E.L.T. 317] passed by the Tribunal Mumbai and in Ascensia Diabetes Care India Pvt