TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (10) TMI 244
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....STM-000-APP-053-2019-20 dated 12th March 2020 ] of Commissioner of CGST & Customs (Appeals), Goa. The original authority had held the 'gold ornaments' to be liable to confiscation owing to lack of eligibility of the passenger for import through baggage besides imposing penalty of Rs. 2,50,000/- under section 112 of Customs Act, 1962 on the appellant. 2. Learned Counsel for the appellant submitted that 'gold ornaments' are not restricted for import and, therefore, in accordance with section 125 of Customs Act, 1962 should mandatorily have been offered for redemption after confiscation under section 111 of Customs Act, 1962. It was further submitted that the appellant had not concealed the 'gold ornaments' and had sought to be directed to 'r....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....... (1) The proper officer may, subject to any rules made under sub-section (2), pass free of duty - (a) xxxxx; (b) any article in the baggage of a passenger in respect of which the said officer is satisfied that it is for the use of the passenger or his family or is a bona fide gift or souvenir; provided that the value of each such article and the total value of all such articles does not exceed such limits as may be specified in the rules.' in section 79 of Customs Act, 1962 for which rules have also been notified by the Central Government. It would, therefore, appear that, within the broad definition of 'baggage' in section 2 of Customs Act, 1962, the exemption is accorded to such goods as for use of the passenger and or his famil....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ese reasons, the contention of the Learned Authorised Representative that Tribunal has no jurisdiction to decide this matter is not tenable. 6. It is on record that the appellant had imported 417 gms. of gold jewellery which was in his possession during the flight from Bangkok and that, upon arrival and at the first point of contact with customs authorities at the airport, he had opted for the 'red channel' procedure. There was also no allegation that the said ornaments were concealed in any manner. 7. It was common ground that the appellant was not entitled to import the gold brought in by him. At the same time, there is no bar on import of gold except that, as 'baggage', only eligible persons may do so. 'Baggage' herein has to be read i....