Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Honourable Mr Justice C. SARAVANAN
Jhansi Rani, W/o. Shri Sathyanarayana – Appellant
Versus
Principal Commissioner of Customs, Chennai-I Commissionerate, Chennai – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. import regulations for gold jewellery. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 2. circumstances leading to confiscation of goods. (Para 5) |
| 3. arguments pertaining to the legality of the confiscation. (Para 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11) |
| 4. court discussion emphasizing the legal consequences of non-declaration. (Para 12 , 13) |
| 5. descriptions on the nature of the goods as prohibited or restricted. (Para 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24) |
| 6. court's decision regarding the appeal and redemption of goods. (Para 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 29) |
| 7. final order allowing for the redemption of the gold. (Para 30 , 31) |
ORDER :
The petitioner is before this Court against the Impugned Order No.17-18-19/2021-Cus.(SZ)/ASRA/Mumbai dated 27.01.2021 made in F.No.373/214A,B,C/B/16-RA/1035 passed by the fourth respondent under Section 129DD of the CUSTOMS ACT , 1962.
2. The petitioner is aggrieved by Impugned Order No.17 in respect of order of the third respondent in Order-in-Appeal C.Cus-I Nos.263 to 265 of 2016 dated 27.06.2016 whereby, the order passed by the Additional Commissioner of Customs in Order-in-Original No.356/2015-2016-AIRPORT made in F.No.O.S.No.793/2015-AIR dated 23.11.2015 has been affirmed.
3. The petitioner flew fr
Legal importation of gold requires compliance with customs duty and declaration; failure to declare renders goods liable for confiscation, but redemption options exist under the Act.
The court ruled that gold jewellery worn by a foreign national upon entering India is considered personal effects and cannot be confiscated without clear legal prohibition.
Personal jewellery carried by a passenger is not subject to customs restrictions if not intended for import, emphasizing the need for clear guidelines from customs authorities.
The court ruled that the Baggage Rules, 2016, cannot exceed or restrict the provisions of the Customs Act, 1962, particularly regarding personal ornaments worn by travelers.
The Baggage Rules do not apply to jewelry worn by travelers, limiting customs authority in seizing sentimental cultural items, framed as ultra vires under Section 79 of the Customs Act.
The central legal point established in the judgment is that the findings of fact cannot be revisited unless they suffer from manifest perversity, and the court's decision was based on the positive fi....
Under the Customs Act, 1962, while the burden of proof regarding the licit nature of seized gold rests on the possessor under S.123, the confiscation of Indian currency as alleged 'sale proceeds' und....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
