https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=467927 A foreign national carrying a Rudraksha mala with gold content was analysed under the Baggage Rules, 2016 framed under the Customs Act, 1962. Rule 3 was applied to foreign tourists entitled to duty-free clearance of bona fide baggage within prescribed limits, while Annexure-I was read as excluding gold or silver in any form other than ornaments. Because the article was worn on the person and treated as jewellery or ornaments rather than prohibited gold, seizure was not justified on that basis. Rule 5, dealing with passengers returning after more than one year abroad, was held inapplicable. The seized article and deposited amounts were therefore directed to be returned. en-us Mon, 09 Oct 2023 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 09 Apr 2026 10:49:29 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=467927 A foreign national carrying a Rudraksha mala with gold content was analysed under the Baggage Rules, 2016 framed under the Customs Act, 1962. Rule 3 was applied to foreign tourists entitled to duty-free clearance of bona fide baggage within prescribed limits, while Annexure-I was read as excluding gold or silver in any form other than ornaments. Because the article was worn on the person and treated as jewellery or ornaments rather than prohibited gold, seizure was not justified on that basis. Rule 5, dealing with passengers returning after more than one year abroad, was held inapplicable. The seized article and deposited amounts were therefore directed to be returned. Case-Laws Customs Mon, 09 Oct 2023 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=467927