Home Case Index All Cases Customs Customs + HC Customs - 2018 (12) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2018 (12) TMI 1371 - HC - CustomsTemporary detention of baggage - Smuggling - gold of third country origin - prohibited goods - N/N. 9 of 1996 Customs dated 22.1.1996 - Whether in the absence of any declaration under Section 77 of the Customs Act any benefit could be extended under Section 80 of the Act? Held that:- Admittedly, the gold seized from the respondent was of the third country origin and had not been exported to Nepal from India. It was purchased by the respondent in London and was then brought by him to Nepal. The bringing of the said gold from London to Nepal amounts to export of gold of the third country to Nepal. Thus, its subsequent import to India is prohibited by the notification - Accordingly, the import of the aforesaid gold into India was in complete violation of the aforesaid notification read with Section 11 of the Act and as such is nothing but smuggling of gold. The notification No. 11/2012-Customs dated 17th March 2012 relied upon by the counsel for the respondent is one which has been issued under Sub-section (1) of Section 25 of the Act exempting certain goods of the specified nature from duty. The said notification exempts the gold of the specified nature upto the limit of 10 Kg. from duty. The aforesaid notification is simply a notification exempting gold from the payment of duty. It does not over ride the prohibition which has been imposed by the notification dated 22nd January 1996 - the notification relied upon on behalf of the respondents dated 17th March 2012 is of no help to him. In fact, it is not applicable to the facts and circumstances of the case. The argument advanced on its basis is therefore not tenable in law. The question raised in this appeal is answered in favour the Custom Department and it is held that the benefit of Section 80 could not have been extended to the respondent by the tribunal when there was no declaration by him under Section 77 of the Act - impugned order set aside - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.
|