https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=48422 The Court upheld the decision of Customs authorities to confiscate two Gold Karas from a petitioner arriving at the airport, as they were considered strips of Gold without design or finishing, not qualifying as jewellery under the Tourist Baggage Rules. Despite the petitioner's argument for re-export under Rule 3, the Court emphasized the obligation for tourists to declare high-value items for re-export, even if not provided with a list by Customs. The intentional concealment of the Gold Karas indicated smuggling, leading to confiscation, with the Court dismissing the writ petition and affirming the confiscation decision. en-us Mon, 25 Nov 1991 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 04 Aug 2010 13:48:56 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=48422 The Court upheld the decision of Customs authorities to confiscate two Gold Karas from a petitioner arriving at the airport, as they were considered strips of Gold without design or finishing, not qualifying as jewellery under the Tourist Baggage Rules. Despite the petitioner's argument for re-export under Rule 3, the Court emphasized the obligation for tourists to declare high-value items for re-export, even if not provided with a list by Customs. The intentional concealment of the Gold Karas indicated smuggling, leading to confiscation, with the Court dismissing the writ petition and affirming the confiscation decision. Case-Laws Customs Mon, 25 Nov 1991 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=48422