Delhi HC Allows Redemption of Rolex Watch, Says Single Watch for Personal Use Not ‘Commercial Quantity’ [Read Order]
The Court cautioned the adjudicating authority to ensure that similar errors did not occur in future orders.
Delhi HC - Rolex Watch - Quantity - taxscan
Delhi HC - Rolex Watch - Quantity - taxscan
The High Court of Delhi, allowed redemption of a detained Rolex watch, ruling that a single watch for personal use cannot be treated as commercial quantity, while directing payment of the redemption fine and applicable warehousing charges.
Mahesh Malkani,petitioner-assessee, travelled to India on 7th March, 2024. Upon his arrival at the Indira Gandhi International Airport, New Delhi, one Rolex watch he was wearing was detained for non-declaration, as per the detention receipt dated 7th March, 2024.
An Order-in-Original was subsequently passed on 30th January, 2025, denying any free allowance, ordering confiscation of the watch valued at Rs. 13,48,500/-, and allowing redemption for re-export upon payment of a fine of Rs. 1,80,000/- within 120 days.
A penalty of Rs. 1,50,000/- was also imposed under the Customs Act, 1962. The redemption period has since lapsed.
Justice Prathiba M Singh and Justice Shail Jain examined the impugned order and identified an error in paragraph 8.4, as pointed out by the petitioner’s counsel. The paragraph incorrectly described the Rolex watch as being in commercial quantity and suggested that the petitioner had imported it in violation of the passenger baggage provisions, despite holding a valid UAE Resident Identity Card.
The Court clarified that a single Rolex watch could not be treated as commercial quantity and could be kept for personal use. Nonetheless, since the option of redemption had already been granted, the petitioner was directed to pay the redemption fine by 31st October, 2025, and redeem the detained article in accordance with the impugned order.
The bench cautioned the adjudicating authority to ensure that similar errors did not occur in future orders. It also directed that the petitioner would be liable to pay warehousing charges applicable on the date of detention. The petition and any pending applications were disposed of in these terms.
Support our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates
