https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=329949 The Government upheld the confiscation of gold jewelry under Section 111 of the Customs Act, 1962, due to the passenger's failure to provide supporting documents. A redemption fine and penalty were imposed under Section 112(a) of the Customs Act, 1962, with the Commissioner (Appeals) affirming the decision. The applicant's claims of the jewelry being old and used for a wedding were dismissed as she did not meet the Baggage Rules, 1998 criteria. The Government rejected the applicant's plea of ignorance of the law, emphasizing compliance requirements. The revision application was denied, sustaining the confiscation and penalties based on lack of evidence and legal provisions. en-us Wed, 11 May 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 13 Jul 2016 14:07:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=329949 The Government upheld the confiscation of gold jewelry under Section 111 of the Customs Act, 1962, due to the passenger's failure to provide supporting documents. A redemption fine and penalty were imposed under Section 112(a) of the Customs Act, 1962, with the Commissioner (Appeals) affirming the decision. The applicant's claims of the jewelry being old and used for a wedding were dismissed as she did not meet the Baggage Rules, 1998 criteria. The Government rejected the applicant's plea of ignorance of the law, emphasizing compliance requirements. The revision application was denied, sustaining the confiscation and penalties based on lack of evidence and legal provisions. Case-Laws Customs Wed, 11 May 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=329949