2018 (12) TMI 1368

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....arthikeyan For The Respondents : Mr A.K. Jayaraj JUDGMENT Pushpa Sathyanarayana, J. 1. The writ appeal is directed against the order dated 21.02.2018 passed by the learned single Judge in W.P.(MD) No. 2985 of 2018. The writ petition was filed by the respondent/writ petitioner for quashing the seizure order made by the third appellant in O.R. No. 22/2018-AIU, Trichy, dated 29.01.2018 in....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....r contended that the respondent had violated the Baggage Rules, 2016. 4. He would further submit that the allowance for jewellery in terms of Rule 5 of the Baggage Rules, 2016 is that a person residing abroad for more than one year, on return to India, shall be allowed clearance free of duty in his bona fide baggage of jewellery up to a weight of 20 grams with a value cap of Rs. 50,000/-, if br....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....124 of the Customs Act, 1962. The said order was passed in February 2018. Admittedly, no progress in the proceedings has been shown. Though the release of the seized items was directed to be given forthwith on deposit of the sum, the said order is also not complied with by the appellants. 6. The learned counsel for the appellants attempted to distinguish the order passed in W.A. No. 581 of 2011....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

...., if the person carried it for somebody else. 8. In reply, the learned counsel for the respondent cited various authorities of this Court and stated that it is only the release of the seized goods ordered whereas, the proceedings under Section 124 had to go on. Admittedly, the authorities have not proceeded with the enquiry in this regard. In the event, the respondent is found guilty, it is alw....