https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=771839 The Delhi HC set aside the detention of gold jewellery worn by a foreign passenger, ruling that used jewellery worn by passengers constitutes "personal effects" under Baggage Rules 2016 and is exempt from customs detention. The court relied on SC precedent in Directorate of Revenue Intelligence v. Pushpa Lekhumal Tolani and Madras HC decision in Thanushika v. Principal Commissioner of Customs. Additionally, customs failed to issue show cause notice within the mandatory one-year period under Section 110 of Customs Act 1962, making detention impermissible. The court ordered release of jewellery without storage charges. en-us Wed, 21 May 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 31 May 2025 08:47:03 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=771839 The Delhi HC set aside the detention of gold jewellery worn by a foreign passenger, ruling that used jewellery worn by passengers constitutes "personal effects" under Baggage Rules 2016 and is exempt from customs detention. The court relied on SC precedent in Directorate of Revenue Intelligence v. Pushpa Lekhumal Tolani and Madras HC decision in Thanushika v. Principal Commissioner of Customs. Additionally, customs failed to issue show cause notice within the mandatory one-year period under Section 110 of Customs Act 1962, making detention impermissible. The court ordered release of jewellery without storage charges. Case-Laws Customs Wed, 21 May 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=771839