TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (5) TMI 2080
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Customs Department. * 01 Yellow Metal kada appearing gold W.P.(C) 4503/2025 Page 2 of 10 * 01 Yellow Metal Chain appearing gold * iPhone 16 Pro 256 GB 4. It is submitted that the detained goods i.e. the gold kada and gold chain are his personal effects and the iphone is also a used mobile phone. Hence, the same are liable to be released. It is further submitted on behalf of the Petitioner that no show cause notice has been issued with respect to the detention of his goods. 5. Mr. Atul Tripathi, ld. Sr. Standing Counsel, has upon instructions placed on record the order in original dated 16th May, 2025. The operative portion be read as under: "i) I deny the 'Free Allowance' if any, admissible to the Pax Yogesh Anand for not declaring the detained goods to the Proper Officer at Red Channel as well to the Customs Officer at Green Channel who intercepted him and recovered the detained goods from him. ii) I order Absolute confiscation of "One chain made of gold having purity 998 and weighing 60 grams valued at Rs. 4,68,247/- (Four Lakh Sixty Eight Thousand Two Hundred Forty Seven Only) and Kada made of gold having purity 993 and ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... in his bona fide baggage, including used personal effects. The relevant provisions of the Rules are extracted hereunder: "2 (vi) "Personal effects" means things required for satisfying daily necessities but does not include jewellery. * * * * 3. Passenger arriving from countries other than Nepal, Bhutan or Myanmar:- An Indian resident or a foreigner residing in India or a tourist of Indian origin, not being an infant arriving from any country other than Nepal, Bhutan or Myanmar, shall be allowed clearance free of duty articles in his bona fide baggage, that is to say, - (a) used personal effects and travel souvenirs; and (b) articles other than those mentioned in Annexure-I, up to the value of fifty thousand rupees if these are carried on the person or in the accompanied baggage of the passenger: Provided that a tourist of foreign origin, not being an infant, shall be allowed clearance free of duty articles in his bona fide baggage, that is to say, (a) used personal effects and travel souvenirs; and (b) articles other than those mentioned in Annexure-I, up to the value of fifteen thousand rupees if these are carried on the pers....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... channel is itself a declaration that he has no dutiable or prohibited articles. Further, a harmonious reading of Rule 7 of the Baggage Rules, 1998 read with Appendix E (2) (quoted above), the respondent was not carrying any dutiable goods because the goods were the bona fide jewellery of the respondent for her personal use and was intended to be taken out of India. Also, with regard to the proximity of purchase of jewellery, all the jewellery was not purchased a few days before the departure of the respondent from UK, a large number of items had been in use for a long period. It did not make any difference whether the jewellery is new or used. There is also no relevance of the argument that since all the jewellery is to be taken out of India, it was, therefore, deliberately brought to India for taking it to Singapore. Foreign tourists are allowed to bring into India jewellery even of substantial value provided it is meant to be taken out of India with them and it is a prerequisite at the time of making endorsements on the passport. Therefore, bringing jewellery into India for taking it out with the passenger is permissible and is not liable to any import duty. * * * * ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ar had come to be issued at a time when the Appendices to the 1998 Rules had employed the phrase "used personal effects, excluding jewellery". The clarification is thus liable to be appreciated in the aforesaid light and the statutory position as enunciated by the respondents themselves requiring the customs officers to bear a distinction between "personal jewellery" and the word "jewellery" when used on its own and as it appears in the Appendices. This position, in our considered opinion, would continue to endure and remain unimpacted by the provisions contained in the 2016 Rules." 11. The above mentioned decision of the Division Bench of this Court was challenged before the Supreme Court in SLP(C) No. 011281 /2025 titled Union of India & Ors. V. Saba Simran. The Supreme Court, while dismissing the said challenge, held as under: "1. Delay condoned. 2. Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and having gone through the materials on record, we see no reason to interfere with the impugned order passed by the High Court. 3. The Special Leave Petition is, accordingly, dismissed. 4. Pending application(s), if any, stands disp....