Gold Chain and Detention : Law on Baggage Rules, 2016 under Customs Act, 1962

Gold Chain and Detention : Law on Baggage Rules, 2016 under Customs Act, 1962

In case of Makhinder Chopra v. Commissioner of Customs [2025] GCtR 1417 (Delhi) while dealing with issue of detained gold chain and application of Baggage Rules, 2016, the detention of gold chain was held to be contrary to law in this case. Jewellery that is bona fide in personal use by the tourist would not be excluded from the ambit of personal effects as defined under the Baggage Rules.

Court has made clear that the practice of making tourists sign undertaking in a standard form waiving the show cause notice and personal hearing is contrary to the provisions of Section 124 of the Customs Act, 1962 hereinafter, the Customs Department is directed to discontinue the said practice.

Customs Act, 1962 and Conflict with Treaty / FTA : HC Resolves the Dilemma

 Customs Act, 1962 and Conflict with Treaty / FTA : HC Resolves the Dilemma

In a recent decision it was argued that a Free Trade Agreement dated August 30, 2009 (AIFTA) between the Republic of India and the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), governs the subject transaction. Accordingly, the Petitioners contended that the initiation of any adjudication proceedings under the Customs Act , 1962 without observing the due process of law and as prescribed in the treaty, which would include the specific dispute resolution mechanism provided under Article 24, is wholly without jurisdiction and unsustainable.

It was held in Purple Products Pvt Ltd v. Union of India [2025] GCtR 1279 (Bombay) that in the context of applying treaties into National Legal Systems, two aspects generally arise: (i) the applicability of the international treaty in domestic law; and (ii) the enforceability of the treaty in municipal law and before municipal courts.

It was held that the provisions of Article 24 of AIFTA cannot be said to have formed a part of the domestic or municipal laws or transformed into domestic or municipal laws to seek their enforcement before a domestic or municipal Court. Based on a treaty provision that is not transformed or incorporated into the national law or statute, the provisions of the existing Customs Act cannot be undermined, or the powers and jurisdiction of the customs authorities questioned.

Refund of Duty : Order of Customs Commissioner Set Aside

Refund of the Duty : Order of Customs Commissioner Set Aside 

Customs Act, 1962 contains around 161 sections. Section 2 (23) of the Act defines what is "import".

In an important case citation [2014] GCtR 3089, the Commissioner, Customs had rejected the application for refund of duty citing certain provisions of the Customs Act, 1962. 

When the action of Customs Commissioner was challenged in the litigation, the Order of Customs Commissioner not to refund the duty was set aside and the applicant was held entitled to the refund of the duty. 

There was a brilliant analysis and implication of the Customs Act, 1962 and the Customs Tariff Act, 1975  done in this case citation [2014] GCtR 3089. 

Written by 

Vishal

Delhi

Notice : Copyright of above blog and its content including headline vests with Vishal. Above should Not be reproduced in any form in newspapers/websites/Ph.D. thesis/College projects/ law firms' newsletters/law journals/books/book chapters without prior written permission. Fair use should be in terms of Copyright Act, 1957. Any violation will make violator liable for Pecuniary compensation with interest towards the author irrespective of the profit made. All disputes shall be subject to Delhi Jurisdiction. Reproduction of judgment or publication of judgment unless expressly prohibited by Court according is not an infringement of copyright according to S. 52 (1)(q)(iv) of Copyright Act, 1957. 

On Income tax Deduction : An Important View of Supreme Court

On Income-tax Act : An Important View of Supreme Court

In the context of Income-tax Act, 1961, an important Judgment was passed by Hon'ble Supreme Court on 31 August 2009.

It has been commented at page 19, 20 of Liberty India v Commissioner of Income Tax [2009] GCtR 58 (SC) thus : -

"On an analysis of Sections 80-IA and 80-IB it becomes clear that any industrial undertaking, which becomes eligible on satisfying sub-section(2), would be entitled to deduction under sub-section (1) only to the extent of profits derived from such industrial undertaking after specified date(s). Hence, apart from eligibility, sub-section (1) purports to restrict the quantum of deduction to a specified percentage of profits. This is the importance of the words "derived from industrial undertaking" as against "profits attributable to industrial undertaking"."

"DEPB is an incentive. It is given under Duty Exemption Remission Scheme. Essentially, it is an export incentive. No doubt, the object behind DEPB is to neutralize the incidence of customs duty payment on the import content of export product. This neutralization is provided for by credit to customs duty against export product. Under DEPB, an exporter may apply for credit as percentage of FOB value of exports made in freely convertible currency. Credit is available only against the export product and at rates specified by DGFT for import of raw materials, components etc.. DEPB credit under the Scheme has to be calculated by taking into account the deemed import content of the export product as per basic customs duty and special additional duty payable on such deemed imports."

"DEPB/Duty Drawback are incentives which flow from the Schemes framed by Central Government or from S. 75 of the Customs Act, 1962, hence, incentives profits are not profits derived from the eligible business under Section 80-IB. They belong to the category of ancillary profits of such Undertakings.” 

Kindly note that full text Judgments of Hon'ble Supreme Court can be downloaded absolutely free of cost from the official website at the link https://main.sci.gov.in/judgments - Then entering the date of Judgment, for example, as 31 August 2009.

Written by 

Vishal

Delhi

Notice : Copyright of above blog and its content including headline vests with Vishal. Above should Not be reproduced in any form in newspapers/websites/Ph.D. thesis/College projects/ law firms' newsletters/law journals/books/book chapters without prior written permission. Fair use should be in terms of Copyright Act, 1957. Any violation will make violator liable for Pecuniary compensation with interest towards the author irrespective of the profit made. All disputes shall be subject to Delhi Jurisdiction.