CESTAT Has No Jurisdiction to Hear Appeals Involving Goods Imported as Baggage as Explicitly Barred by S. 129A(1) of Customs Act [Read Order]
CESTAT held that it has no jurisdiction to hear appeals involving goods imported as baggage under Section 129A(1) of the Customs Act.
CESTAT - Jurisdiction - Hear Appeals Involving Goods Imported - Baggage - Explicitly - Customs Act - taxscan
CESTAT - Jurisdiction - Hear Appeals Involving Goods Imported - Baggage - Explicitly - Customs Act - taxscan
The Allahabad Bench of the Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) held that it has no jurisdiction to hear appeals involving goods imported as baggage, as such cases are expressly excluded under the proviso to Section 129A(1) of the Customs Act, 1962.
The appeal was filed by Mr. Sonu Kumar Chaurasiya, who had arrived at CCSI Airport, Lucknow, from Dubai on 19 December 2021. On inspection, Customs officers discovered gold weighing 228.800 grams, valued at Rs. 11,64,592, concealed inside a hammer in his baggage. The gold and the hammer were seized under Section 110 of the Customs Act, 1962.
GST Rulings Change Fast! Stay updated, stay compliant! Click here
After completing the investigation, the department issued a show cause notice dated 12 May 2022 proposing confiscation of the seized goods and penalties under the Customs Act. The Adjudicating Authority, through an Order-in-Original dated 11 April 2023, ordered confiscation and imposed penalties.
The Commissioner (Appeals) later dismissed the appellant’s appeal through Order-in-Appeal dated 6 May 2024. Aggrieved by this, the appellant filed an appeal before the CESTAT.
When the case was called for hearing, the appellant remained absent, and the revenue counsel argued that the goods were brought into India as part of the appellant’s baggage and that, under the proviso to Section 129A(1) of the Customs Act, appeals relating to goods imported or exported as baggage are outside the Tribunal’s jurisdiction.
GST Rulings Change Fast! Stay updated, stay compliant! Click here
The two-member bench comprising Sanjiv Srivastava (Technical Member) and K. Anpazhakan (Judicial Member) observed that the issue involved the confiscation of goods imported as baggage. It referred to Section 129A(1), which clearly bars the Tribunal from deciding appeals against orders of the Commissioner (Appeals) when such orders concern baggage import or export.
The tribunal explained that since the appeal concerned the confiscation of goods imported as baggage, it was legally barred from being heard under Section 129A(1). The tribunal dismissed the appeal as not maintainable and directed that the appellant may seek a remedy before the appropriate forum if permitted by law.
Support our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates
