TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1991 (1) TMI 304
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ssenger and the articles in question were her personal jewellery and the applicant has booked her ticket and she has to go within 10 days to the foreign country. Sri B.B. Sarkar, JDR, contended that the orders in question are justifiable. 2. After hearing both the sides, we hereby dispense with the predeposit of penalty imposed as the applicant has made out a prima facie case. By consent of both the sides, we proceed to hear the appeal. 3. The facts in brief are that the appellant, Mrs. Meera Datta holding Singapore Passport along with her husband and son arrived at Calcutta Airport from Singapore by TG-313 on 27-10-1990. She opted the green channel and did not declare the gold jewelleries which were seized from her hand-bag as described ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nce with law. In support of his arguments, he relied on the following decisions : (1) 1987 (31) E.L.T. 1021 (Tribunal NRB) - Laxmi Devi Kumar v. Collector of Customs, New Delhi. (2) Order No. 261/Cal/88-261, dated 8th August, 1988 - Mrs. Boonma Cameron v. Collector of Customs (Prev.), West Bengal. 5. The learned Departmental Representative, Sri Sarkar contended before us that the appellant under Section 77 of the Customs Act, should have given a declaration which she had not done in this case. He also contended that in terms of Section 79 of the Customs Act, Tourist Baggage Rules have been framed which permit temporary import of baggage free of duty and the personal effects which include jewellery. In ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ome up with a weak excuse and vague defence and that will not absolve her from personal responsibility pertaining to the true declaration on arrival. In this case there cannot be any concealment of the gold jewellery. Normally, ladies take their jewelleries in their hand-bag. The appellant had taken them in the bag and it cannot be said that there was any concealment. 7. The learned Advocate, Sri Sekhar Mukhopadhyay very vehemently relied on the decision of the North Regional Bench reported in 1987 (31) E.L.T. 1021 - Laxmi Devi Kumar v. Collector of Customs, New Delhi. 8. To appreciate the contentions of both the sides, it is necessary to advert into Rules 3 and 7 of the Tourist Baggage Rules, 1978. Under Rule 3 of the Baggage Rules, the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....f articles of high value brought by him signed by the proper officer who examines his baggage. Such list shall be given to the tourist and unless this list is produced by the tourist to the proper officer at the time of examination of the baggage on his departure from India his baggage may not be allowed clearance. In terms of the Tourist Baggage Rules, such a list should be given. It was urged on behalf of the Revenue that the appellant's jewellery was of the nature of high value articles and, therefore, under Rule 7(2), a list of the same should have been filed by the appellant, but under Rule 7(2) the tourist shall be given on arrival and after examination of his baggage a list of articles of high value brought by him signed by the prope....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....bunal further held at page 1026 as follows: "It is seen that the appellant chose the green channel for clearance of her baggage. She committed to (no?) violation of law or infraction of any instruction for clearance of the baggage through the green channel as she being tourist had no dutiable goods to declare under the Tourist Baggage Rules brought to my notice by both sides as the appellant was entitled to import personal jewellery duty free. There is no plea that the jewellery found with her could not be considered as personal jewellery. There are no adverse findings in this regard by the lower authority. Two karas are shown in the inventory as crude in form but lower authority has not held that it was so in fact. The learned SDR also ha....