https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=776471 The HC set aside the absolute confiscation of four gold bangles weighing 100 grams, held as personal effects by the Petitioner. The Adjudicating Authority's finding that the bangles were prohibited goods due to high purity and not jewellery was contrary to settled law. The court relied on SC precedent confirming jewellery carried by tourists qualifies as personal effects and cannot be summarily confiscated without allowing payment of duty or penalty. The Petitioner was denied a personal hearing, violating natural justice principles. The HC directed release of the gold bangles within four weeks upon payment of warehousing charges, allowing the Petitioner to redeem the goods. en-us Wed, 23 Jul 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 12 Aug 2025 08:32:24 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=776471 The HC set aside the absolute confiscation of four gold bangles weighing 100 grams, held as personal effects by the Petitioner. The Adjudicating Authority's finding that the bangles were prohibited goods due to high purity and not jewellery was contrary to settled law. The court relied on SC precedent confirming jewellery carried by tourists qualifies as personal effects and cannot be summarily confiscated without allowing payment of duty or penalty. The Petitioner was denied a personal hearing, violating natural justice principles. The HC directed release of the gold bangles within four weeks upon payment of warehousing charges, allowing the Petitioner to redeem the goods. Case-Laws Customs Wed, 23 Jul 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=776471