IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 3491 of 2026 =============================================

M/S. SKYLINE GLOBAL TRADERS THROUGH BRIJESH KUMAR SINGH Versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS.

=============================================

Appearance:

MR HARDIK P MODH(5344) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1 MR UTKARSH SHARMA, FOR MR PRADIP D BHATE(1523) for the Respondent(s) No. 1,2,3 =============================================

CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.S. SUPEHIA and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRANAV TRIVEDI Date : 13/03/2026

ORAL ORDER

(PER : HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.S. SUPEHIA)

1. At the outset, learned advocate Mr.Hardik P. Modh, appearing for the petitioner has submitted that the matter is squarely covered by the common judgment and order passed by this Court dated 09.03.2026 in Special Civil Application No. 16799 of 2025 and allied matters. Thus, it is urged that while dismissing those writ petitions, the directions with regard to filing an application seeking re-export of the goods may also be passed in the present matter. It is further urged that if the petitioner files any application for re-export of the goods, the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence may consider the same and pass an appropriate order on such application.

2. As mentioned by the learned advocate Mr.Modh, on an identical issue and facts, this Court in the common judgment and order dated 09.03.2026 passed in Special Civil Application No. 16799 of 2025 and allied matters has dismissed the writ petitions seeking release of the seized industrial oil by observing thus:

46. Keeping in mind the aforesaid principles enunciated by the Supreme Court, we have attempted to distinguish the case of the petitioners for the following reasons.

47. Significantly, in the Test Reports in the case of Gastrade International (supra), the Apex Court has recorded that there was no opinion and finding expressed that the imported goods are “most akin” to HSD, which is not the issue in the Test Reports in question. In the first test report of CRCL, Visakhapatnam, out of 18 parameters tested, except for the parameters relating to flash point, distillation recovery and sulphur, the report categorically records that the sample is mainly composed of diesel fraction, is adulterated with lighter hydrocarbons, and is most “akin to HFHSD (IS 16861) / adulterated HFHSD”. The diesel fraction is found to be between 95% to 98%). Thus, out of 21 parameters, the 18 parameters tested by CRCL, Visakhapatnam and MRPL, there is a clear opinion by the laboratory that the sample meets all characteristics of ADF and HFHSD, except the flash point, which is lowered by mixing lighter hydrocarbons. In this context, we may refer to the definition of ‘adulteration’ as supplied in the ‘Malpractices Order,2005’. It reads thus:

“2(a) "adulteration" means [presence of marker in motor spirit and high speed diesel and/or] [Inserted by Notification No. G.S.R. 18(E) dated 12.1.2007 (w.e.f. 21.12.2005).] the introduction of any foreign substance into motor spirit or high speed diesel illegally or unauthorisedly with the result that the product does not conform to the requirements of the Bureau of Indian Standards specifications number IS 2796 and IS 1460 for motor spirit and high speed diesel respectively or any other requirement notified by the Central Government from time to time;”

Thus, any foreign substance, which is blended in high speed diesel illegally or unauthorizedly, which ultimate results into failure of requirements of BIS specifications IS 1460 is an adulteration.

48. In the instant case, there is a definite conclusion that the flash point, which is one of the most important parameters as emphasized by the Supreme Court, has been lowered by the use of lighter hydrocarbons and the product is therefore characterized as adulterated HFHSD. No such clear and unambiguous opinion was rendered by any of the three laboratories in the case of Gastrade International(supra) and also by the expert, who wa