Home Case Index All Cases Customs Customs + AT Customs - 2020 (6) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2020 (6) TMI 396 - AT - CustomsSmuggling - Import of Gold Jewellery - ‘bona fide’ baggage - Baggage Rules - case of Revenue is that the jurisdiction in a dispute relating to ‘baggage’ vested with the Government of India, in its revisionary authority, and was not under the appellate jurisdiction of the Tribunal - Confiscation - penalty - HELD THAT:- On perusal of the Rules pertaining to importation of jewellery, as baggage by an arriving passenger, it is seen that the quantity in the present dispute is far in excess of that allowed free of duty on import into India. Therefore, the passenger has failed to comply with declaration requirements and confiscation under section 111(1) of Customs Act, 1962 is not misplaced. Confiscation - HELD THAT:- The appellant is a citizen of Malaysia and intends to return to her country of domicile. She was unable to carry into, and wear the gold jewellery in, India and it is her request that she should be allowed to carry it back with her on the return trip to Malaysia. In view of these circumstances and this plea, while holding that the goods are liable for confiscation under section 111(1) of Customs Act, 1962, we desist from endorsing the conformation - Confiscation set aside. Imposition of penalty u/s 112(a) of the Customs Act, 1962 - HELD THAT:- As the goods were liable for confiscation, the liability to penalty under section 112(a) of the Customs Act, 1962 is not unwarranted - the imposition of penalty of would suffice to meet the ends of justice. Appeal disposed off.
|