Ask Jurishour AI

Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
tdb_templates
saswp_reviews
saswp-collections
saswp_rvs_location
tdc-review-email
web-story-font
web-story
googlesitekit_email
tds_locker
tds_email
saswp
mailpoet_page
mailpoet_email
tdcpt_tunes
tdc-review
pronamic_payment
pronamic_gateway
pronamic_pay_subscr
wpcode
HomeIndirect TaxesDelhi High Court Delivers Major Relief to Returning Indians Carrying Gold Jewellery

Delhi High Court Delivers Major Relief to Returning Indians Carrying Gold Jewellery

Published on

🚀 Stay Connected With JurisHour

WhatsApp X Telegram

The Delhi High Court has held that gold jewellery worn by passengers cannot automatically be treated as smuggled goods merely because of its purity.

The judgment came in the case of Ashiya, an Indian woman who returned from Saudi Arabia in November 2023 wearing four gold bangles weighing 250 grams of 24-carat (998 purity) gold. Customs authorities at Delhi airport seized the ornaments, alleging smuggling on the ground that jewellery of such high purity should be classified as bullion rather than personal use items.

The court quashed the seizure, observing that the bangles were worn openly and not concealed, which indicated personal use. The bench noted that Ashiya was neither a repeat offender nor carrying gold in quantities suggestive of commercial intent. The court allowed her to retrieve her jewellery after paying warehousing charges, rejecting the Customs’ attempt to impose penalties.

Customs’ Argument vs. Judicial Clarification

  • Customs’ claim: Officials maintained that 24-carat jewellery is uncommon, and ornaments of such purity should be treated as bullion—attracting fines and confiscation.
  • Court’s clarification: The judges disagreed, ruling that the law does not distinguish between 22-carat and 24-carat jewellery under the Baggage Rules, 2016. Simply being of high purity does not transform ornaments into bullion. If jewellery is worn on the body and not hidden, it should be treated as personal jewellery.

What the Law Provides

Under the Baggage Rules, 2016, travellers are permitted to bring personal jewellery and belongings into India. Referring to earlier cases such as Pushpa Lekhumal Tolani and Saba Simran, the High Court reiterated that high purity does not automatically imply commercial import. Confiscation or penalties apply only when concealment or intent to evade duties is established.

Advice for Passengers Returning from Abroad

Legal experts have urged travellers to exercise caution when carrying gold jewellery back to India. They suggest:

  • Keeping old photographs or other evidence showing prior use of the jewellery.
  • Retaining engraving marks, scratches, or bills as proof of ownership.
  • Declaring gold items in baggage declarations to avoid disputes.

Experts caution that brand-new, tagged, or packaged jewellery is more likely to attract suspicion from Customs under Sections 112(a) and 112(b) of the Customs Act, which provide for penalties in cases of undeclared or misdeclared goods.

Read More: Sameer Wankhede Addresses Drug Abuse in Mumbai, Stays Guarded on Defamation Case Against Aryan Khan’s Web Series

Mariya Paliwala
Mariya Paliwalahttps://www.jurishour.in/
Mariya is the Senior Editor at Juris Hour. She has 7+ years of experience on covering tax litigation stories from the Supreme Court, High Courts and various tribunals including CESTAT, ITAT, NCLAT, NCLT, etc. Mariya graduated from MLSU Law College, Udaipur (Raj.) with B.A.LL.B. and also holds an LL.M. She started her career as a freelance tax reporter in the leading online legal news companies.

Latest articles

JURISHOUR | TAX LAW DAILY BULLETIN : 16 SEPTEMBER, 2026

Here’s the Tax Law Daily Bulletin for  September 16, 2026.GSTGST REVOCATION ORDER QUASHED AFTER...

CBIC Circulars Not Binding On GSTAT; Inverted Duty Refund Available Where Inputs And Finished Goods Are Distinct: GSTAT

The Goods and Services Tax Appellate Tribunal (GSTAT), Kolkata Bench, has upheld a refund...

Money Received by Intermediary Not Enough to Prove Public Servant Accepted Bribe: Supreme Court Acquits RPF Officer

The Supreme Court has acquitted a former Divisional Security Commissioner of the Railway Protection...

Loan Recovery Can’t Become “Instrument of Oppression”: Supreme Court Awards Rs.10 Lakh Compensation for Midnight Repossession of Truck

The Supreme Court has strongly deprecated the forcible repossession of a borrower’s truck by...

More like this

JURISHOUR | TAX LAW DAILY BULLETIN : 16 SEPTEMBER, 2026

Here’s the Tax Law Daily Bulletin for  September 16, 2026.GSTGST REVOCATION ORDER QUASHED AFTER...

CBIC Circulars Not Binding On GSTAT; Inverted Duty Refund Available Where Inputs And Finished Goods Are Distinct: GSTAT

The Goods and Services Tax Appellate Tribunal (GSTAT), Kolkata Bench, has upheld a refund...

Money Received by Intermediary Not Enough to Prove Public Servant Accepted Bribe: Supreme Court Acquits RPF Officer

The Supreme Court has acquitted a former Divisional Security Commissioner of the Railway Protection...