https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=784683 The dominant issue was whether an appeal to CESTAT lay against a Commissioner (Appeals) order concerning confiscation of a gold chain brought by a passenger as baggage, including disputes on "personal effects" and the obligation to file a baggage declaration under s. 77. Applying the proviso to s. 129A(1) of the Customs Act, CESTAT held that where the order relates to goods imported as baggage, no appeal is maintainable before the Tribunal, and the statutory remedy is revision before the Central Government under s. 129DD. Consequently, the appeal was rejected as not maintainable, without adjudicating the merits. en-us Thu, 08 Jan 2026 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 10 Jan 2026 08:25:18 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=784683 The dominant issue was whether an appeal to CESTAT lay against a Commissioner (Appeals) order concerning confiscation of a gold chain brought by a passenger as baggage, including disputes on "personal effects" and the obligation to file a baggage declaration under s. 77. Applying the proviso to s. 129A(1) of the Customs Act, CESTAT held that where the order relates to goods imported as baggage, no appeal is maintainable before the Tribunal, and the statutory remedy is revision before the Central Government under s. 129DD. Consequently, the appeal was rejected as not maintainable, without adjudicating the merits. Case-Laws Customs Thu, 08 Jan 2026 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=784683