https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=329868 Goods carried for another person and not declared to Customs were treated as non-bona fide baggage and therefore liable to confiscation under the Customs Act, 1962. The passenger's later claim that the camera was a gift was rejected because the record supported his admission that he was only carrying it for someone else, and the declaration requirement had been contravened. On that basis, redemption under section 125 was denied and the penalty was held justified and proportionate. The revision succeeded, the order allowing redemption and reducing penalty was set aside, and the original order of absolute confiscation and penalty was restored. en-us Mon, 21 Mar 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 11 Jul 2016 10:21:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=329868 Goods carried for another person and not declared to Customs were treated as non-bona fide baggage and therefore liable to confiscation under the Customs Act, 1962. The passenger's later claim that the camera was a gift was rejected because the record supported his admission that he was only carrying it for someone else, and the declaration requirement had been contravened. On that basis, redemption under section 125 was denied and the penalty was held justified and proportionate. The revision succeeded, the order allowing redemption and reducing penalty was set aside, and the original order of absolute confiscation and penalty was restored. Case-Laws Customs Mon, 21 Mar 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=329868