Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether a photocopier and a personal computer could be treated as personal and household effects under Rule 2 of the T.R. Rules, and whether they could alternatively be allowed as professional goods under Rule 4 of the Baggage Rules.
Analysis: The deciding authority held that personal and household effects are confined to articles required for immediate personal use or for running a household. It found that a photocopier and a computer did not answer that description at the relevant time, and rejected the view that everything not expressly excluded by the baggage rules could be treated as personal and household effects. The alternate claim of professional use was also rejected because the respondent had not established entitlement under the professional goods provision.
Conclusion: The claim for free importation of the photocopier and computer as personal and household effects was not accepted, and the alternate plea as professional goods also failed.
Final Conclusion: The order-in-appeal was set aside and the order-in-original was restored, leaving the duty liability intact.
Ratio Decidendi: Articles qualify as personal and household effects only if they are ordinarily required for immediate personal use or for household purposes, and technologically sophisticated goods do not become covered merely because they are not expressly excluded by the baggage rules.