Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

Under Sub-section (2) of Section 79 of the Customs Act, the Central Government has framed Baggage Rules, 1978 and the Tourist Baggage Rules, 1978. Rules 2,3 & 4 of Baggage Rules, 1978 introduced under Notification No. 101-Cus. F. No. 495/24/78-Cus. VI dated the 16th. May, 1978 as amended by Notifications No. 213-Cus. dated 13.11.79, No. 247-Cus. dated 26.12.1980, No. 57/83-Cus/F. No. Bud/83 and No. 166/83-Cus/ F. No. 495/20/83-Cus. VI, read as follows:-

"2. Used Personal Effects:- The used articles of personal wear (excluding Jewellery but including not more than one wrist-watch) of value not exceeding five hundred rupees (and articles in personal use of passengers for satisfying daily necessities of life may be passed free of duty).

5. Exemption from duty on gifts etc. imported by tourist of foreign origin:-

In addition to articles allowed under Rules 3 & 4, a tourist of foreign origin staying in India, for more than 24 hours may also be allowed to import free of duty, at the discretion of the proper officer, articles other than those mentioned in Rule 9 of the Baggage Rules, 1978, upto a value of five hundred rupees if these are intended for personal use or for making gifts.

6. Exemption from customs duty on gifts etc. imported by tourists of Indian origin:-

Tourists of Indian origin, who are normally residents abroad and are staying in India for more that 24 hours may allowed to import free of duty, at the discretion of the proper officer, articles intended to be given away as gifts.
Provided that the articles are such as are covered by Rule 3 read with Rule 9 of the Baggage Rules, 1978.
Provided further that all the conditions and limitations mentioned in Rules 3 & 9 of the Baggage Rules, 1978 are satisfied.
9. Refusal of exemption in certain cases.

Notwithstanding anything contained in these rules, the proper officer may refuse to a tourist, exemption granted by these rules in any of the following cases namely:-

(a) When the total quantity of a commodity imported by a tourist ex- ceeds substantially the limit laid down in these rules;
(b) where the tourist enters into India more than once in a month;
(c) where the tourist is under seventeen years of age."

8. The goods which have been confiscated by the Additional Collector are not personal effects of the appellant. The goods also do not fall within the category of household articles, as mentioned in Rule 4 of the Baggage Rules, 1978. The goods imported by the appellant are also not within the value limit prescribed for personal use or making gifts under Rule 3 of the Baggage Rules, 1978 and Rule 5 of the Tourist Baggage Rules, 1978. The articles which may be brought by the Tourists of Indian Origin under Rule 6 of the Tourist Baggage Rules for the purpose of making gifts are restricted to the extent as may be allowed to be imported free of duty at the discretion of the proper officer. Therefore, under saving Clause 11 (1) (g) the goods which a passenger can bring as baggage are limited to the extent indicated in the aforesaid rules of the Baggage Rules. For allowing any Article as baggage, proper officer must be satisfied about their bonafide as baggage and subject to the extent and limit prescribed in the aforesaid rules. In the present case, the Additional Collector has held that the goods which have been confiscated by the impugned order are not bonafide baggage and the same are in commercial quantity. The impugned goods are not, therefore, protected by the saving Clause 11.(1) (g) of the Imports (Control) Order, 1955. Rule-3 of the Imports (Control) Order, 1955 provides that no person shall import any goods of the description specified in Schedule 1, except under and in accordance with a licence or a customs clearance permit granted by the Central Government or by any officer specified in Schedule II to the said Order. The learned J.D.R. has aruged that the impugned goods are consumable goods and the imports thereof, except under an import licence or a customs clearance permit, is prohibited. This argument of the learned J.D.R. has not been controverted by the learned Advocate, except saying that the goods are protected from requirement of a licence or customs clearance permit under saving Clause 11 (1) (g) of the Imports(Control) order. I have already held that the impugned goods are not protected by the said saving Clause. In Part-B of Appendix-2 of Import & Export Policy for April, 1985 to March, 1988 (Vol. 1), there is a list of restricted items. At serial No. 121 of this list at page 122 of the said Volume -1 of the Import & Export Policy "all consumer goods, howsoever described, of industrial, agricultural or animal origin, not appearing individually in Appendices 3 Part-A and 5 or specifically listed for import under Open General Licence" have been mentioned. The imported goods being prohibited goods, the Additional Collector has rightly confiscated the same under Section 111 (d) of the Customs Act, 1962.1 have already observed earlier that the impugned goods confiscated under the Order-in-Original were not declared by the appellant. They are, therefore, liable to confiscation under Sections 111 (I) and (m) of the Customs Act, 1962. I do not, therefore, find any infirmity in the order of the Additional Collector which has been challenged in this appeal. In these circumstances, the impugned order is upheld and the appeal is dismissed.