2025 (7) TMI 1654

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....hereinafter, the 'detention order'), vide which, goods of the Petitioner being, one gold chain and two gold bangles, totally weighing around 200 grams were seized by the Customs department. Background of the case: 3. A brief background of the present case is that the Petitioner was travelling from Dubai to India on 2nd May, 2023. The Petitioner was wearing the jewellery being, one gold chain and two gold bangles, totally weighing 200 grams. Thereafter, while crossing the green channel, the Petitioner was intercepted by the Custom officials and the said jewellery was detained vide detention recipient No. DR/INDEL4/02-05-2023/001784 dated 2nd May, 2023. Further, on 1st August, 2023 the Petitioner signed a pre-filled waiver form, which accor....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... fide intention in the non-declaration of jewellery which was brought for personal use. Accordingly, the case stands on a different footing and thus the impugned gold jewellery should be released on payment of redemption fine and penalty as there was no intention of financial gains by bringing jewellery without declaration. 5.7 Considering the facts of the case and in view of established violation of Section 77 of the Customs Act, 1962, I uphold the penalty under Sections 112(a) & 112(b) of the Customs Act, 1962. ORDER 6.0 In view of discussion above, I allow the appeal against O-in-O No. 854/001942/02.05.2023/WH/2023-24 dated 25.09.2023. The impugned Gold jewellery i.e. One Gold chain and two Gold bangles weighing 200 grams having pu....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ppeal should not be annulled or any other order, as deemed fit be passed by the Government on the ground so stipulated in the said revision application. 3.Ms. Laxmi Chauhan, Uttarakhand, should state in writing whether he would like to be heard in person before the case is decided he should note that if no reply is received within the time limit stipulated above or he docs not turn up for the personal hearing when fixed, the case may be decided on merits." Case of the Petitioner: 8. The case of the Petitioner is that the jewellery detained by the Customs department is her personal jewellery and is within the ambit of 'personal effects' as provided under the Baggage Rules. Further, no Show Cause Notice was issued to the Petitioner as als....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... 12. In this matter, no Show Cause Notice has been issued to the Petitioner and no personal hearing was also granted before passing of the Order-in-Original. 13. The jewellery carried by the Petitioner squarely falls within the ambit of 'personal effects' as provided under the Baggage Rules. The jewellery was admittedly received as a gift from her mother-in-law and was being personally worn and carried by the Petitioner at the time of her arrival in India. 14. As per the established legal position, jewellery items of personal use come within the ambit of 'personal effects' under the Baggage Rules and would be exempt from detention by the Customs Department. This principle of law has been held in a catena of judgments, including a recent d....