Case Details: Alisher Ochilov vs. Commissioner of Customs (2025) 34 Centax 187 (Del.)
Judiciary and Counsel Details
- Prathiba M. Singh & Rajneesh Kumar Gupta, JJ.
- S/Shri Aman Yadav & Aamir Chaudhary, Advs. for the Petitioner
- S/Shri Harpreet Singh, SSC with Jai Ahuja, Ms Sanidhya Sharma & Ms Vanshika Kapoor, Advs., for the Respondent
Facts of the Case
The petitioner, a foreign national from Uzbekistan, arrived in India wearing two used gold chains weighing 199 grams, which were detained by the Customs Department vide detention receipt. The petitioner contended that the detained articles constituted personal jewellery, falling within the ambit of ‘personal effects’ under the Baggage Rules, 2016, and hence could not be detained. It was further submitted that once goods are detained, section 110 of the Customs Act, 1962 mandates the issuance of a show cause notice within one year (six months initially, extendable by another six months) and that no such notice had been issued nor any order passed even after the lapse of the statutory period. The petitioner expressed readiness to furnish an undertaking to re-export the jewellery and to pay applicable storage and warehousing charges. The matter was accordingly placed before the High Court.
High Court Held
The High Court held that the two used gold chains worn by the petitioner were personal jewellery covered under the definition of ‘personal effects’ in the Baggage Rules, 2016 and thus were not liable to detention. The Court observed that the Department, having failed to issue a show cause notice or pass any order within the statutory period prescribed under section 110 of the Customs Act, 1962, could not retain the goods indefinitely. It directed the Customs Department to release the gold chains to the petitioner, subject to payment of the entire storage and warehousing charges applicable as on the date of detention and on the petitioner furnishing an undertaking for their re-export.
List of Cases Cited
- Directorate of Revenue Intelligence v. Pushpa Lekhumal Tolani — 2017 (353) E.L.T. 129 (S.C.) — Relied on [Para 8]
- Makhinder Chopra v. Commissioner — (2025) 32 Centax 50 (Del.) — Relied on [Para 8]
- Saba Simran v. Union of India — (2025) 27 Centax 34 (Del.) — Relied on [Para 8]
