Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

"2. xxxxxxxxx. I agree with the appellants‟ contention that the provisions of Section 2(22) of the Customs Act which defines the goods makes a clear distinction between the baggage and currency. If the Indian Currency is included in the expression „baggage‟, there was no need to define the currency separately. I also find force in the appellants‟ contention that the charges against the appellants are under the provisions of Section 113(d) i.e. for misdeclaration. As such, I hold that the Tribunal was having jurisdiction to decide the matter. No merits are found in the Revenue's application and miscellaneous application is accordingly rejected."

21. For a start, 'currency', for purposes of Customs Act, 1962, is goods but the context of its inclusion in the definition of 'goods' is mystifying for, unlike the other 'deemed goods', 'currency' is neither defined nor accorded special provisioning in Customs Act, 1962. There is no deployment of the expression anywhere in Customs Act, 1962 except for 'foreign currency' in section 14 therein where it is anything but goods. More particularly, 'currency' was never the target of prohibitory notification under section 11 of Customs Act, 1962. Indeed, C/51745-51746, 51752 & 51807/2025 there is no scope for appreciation of its significance here from Sea Customs Act, 1878 either which did not even venture to define 'goods'