2018 (8) TMI 1530

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... n, AC (AR) for the Respondent ORDER Brief facts of the case are that on 16.06.2016, Shrimati Anees Fathima Bande Nawas, arriving from Dubai, by Air India Flight, was intercepted by a lady customs officer at the Anna International Terminal of Chennai Airport on suspicion that she was carrying gold in her baggage or in person. After examination, it was found that she was wearing gold chain on he .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... present appeal is not maintainable before the Tribunal. That, as per Section 129(A), the Tribunal has no jurisdiction to decide any appeal in respect of an order which relates to any goods imported or exported as baggage. He submitted that as per the New Baggage Rules, 2016, even if the jewellery is worn on the person, it would not come within the definition of 'personal effects' and, therefore, .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... imported or exported as baggage. 6. As the gold chains fall within the category of 'baggage' and not 'personal effects', I am of the view that the present appeal is not maintainable. The appeal is dismissed as not maintainable due to lack of jurisdiction. The appellant is at liberty to file appeal before the proper forum. (Operative portion of the order was Pronounced in open court)
Case law .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X