https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=762439 The HC held that personal jewellery carried by a passenger as used personal effects is not liable to confiscation or duty under the 2016 Customs Rules. The court clarified that the distinction between personal jewellery and newly acquired jewellery must be recognized, as per Circular No. 72/98-Customs and the Rules. The impugned order of confiscation was set aside, as the Customs authorities misconstrued the Rules by treating the jewellery as prohibited goods without considering it as used personal effects exempt from duty limits. The petitioner's gold ornaments were thus wrongly detained and confiscated. en-us Wed, 27 Nov 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 26 Jul 2025 12:06:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=762439 The HC held that personal jewellery carried by a passenger as used personal effects is not liable to confiscation or duty under the 2016 Customs Rules. The court clarified that the distinction between personal jewellery and newly acquired jewellery must be recognized, as per Circular No. 72/98-Customs and the Rules. The impugned order of confiscation was set aside, as the Customs authorities misconstrued the Rules by treating the jewellery as prohibited goods without considering it as used personal effects exempt from duty limits. The petitioner's gold ornaments were thus wrongly detained and confiscated. Case-Laws Customs Wed, 27 Nov 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=762439