Ms. Puja Jayant & Ors. v. Commissioner of Customs, IGI Airport

1. This hearing has been done through hybrid mode. CM APPL. 57278/2025 (for exemption)

2. Allowed, subject to all just exceptions. Application is disposed of.

3. The present petition reveals a concerning situation with respect to the functioning of the Customs Department at I.G.I. Airport.

4. The petition has been filed by the Petitioners under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, inter alia, seeking release of their gold jewellery seized by the Customs Department, I.G.I. Airport.

5. The details of the detained jewellery which were detained vide detention receipts dated 6th September, 2022, are as under: ● One gold chain weighing 100gms ● One gold chain weighing 51gms ● One gold chain weighing 250gms (hereinafter ‘gold jewellery’)

6. A brief background of the Petitioner’s case is that, Petitioners i.e Petitioner No.1 - Ms. Puja Jayant who is the wife of Petitioner No.3 - Mr. Jayant Shastri, along with Petitioner No.2-Ms. Manisha Shastri, who is the sister of Petitioner No. 3, were travelling to India from Dubai to attend a family wedding. Upon their arrival, they were intercepted by the Customs department on 6th September, 2022 and the gold jewellery worn by them was detained vide three separate detention receipts dated 6th September 2022.

7. On 21st March, 2023, a representation is stated to have been filed by the Petitioners’ Counsel (hereinafter ‘first representation’), requesting the Customs Department not to dispose of their gold jewellery.

8. Additionally, a personal hearing was also given to the Petitioner on 28th March 2023, wherein the Petitioners emphasised that the gold jewellery was their personal use effects and requested the same to be released for re-export.

9. Thereafter, the Order-in-Original was passed on 28th April, 2023, by the Commissioner of Customs (Delhi Airport) (hereinafter ‘OIO’). In terms of the OIO, the gold jewellery was permitted to be released with payment of a fine of Rs.[2] lakhs for re-export to UAE. The operative portion of the said order reads as under: “ORDER i) I deny the free allowance as admissible to the to the Pax(s) on account of various omission and commission, as discussed hereinabove; ii) I order confiscation of the above Gold chains total weighing 401 gms, having tariff value of Rs.17,96,907/- (Rupees Seventeen Lakh Ninety Six Thousand Nine Hundred Seven Only) and seized from possession of Pax-1, Pax-2 & Pax-3 under Section 111(d), 111(i), 111(j), 111(l), 111(m)& 111 (o) of the Customs Act, 1962; iii) I give an option to redeem the goods confiscated above to the Pax- 1&3 i.e. Ms. Puja jayant & Mr. Jayant Shastri on payment of Redemption Fine of Rs.2,00,000/-( Rupees Two Lakh only ) to be paid jointly or severally, under Section 125 of Customs Act, 1962 and allowed the same for re -export to UAE only. The redemption is to be allowed after the completion of legal formalities in this regard and also fulfillment of any regulatory’ clearances / approvals required. The offer of redemption, if accepted, shall be subject to condition that the Pax(s) shall not dispute the identity’ and valuation of the seized goods. The offer of redemption shall cease after 120 days from date of the receipt of this order; iv) I give an option to redeem the goods confiscated above to the Pax-2, Ms. Mnaisha Shastri, on payment of Redemption Fine of Rs.75,000/- ( Rupees Seventy Five Thousand only) under Section 125 of Customs Act, 1962. The redemption is to be allowed after the completion of legal formalities in this regard and also fulfillment of any regulatory clearances / approvals required. The offer of redemption, if accepted, shall be subject to condition that the Pax shall not dispute the identity and valuation of the seized goods. The offer of redemption shall cease after 120 days from date of the receipt of this order; v) I impose a penalty of Rs. 1,00,000 / - (Rupees One Lakh only) upon the Pax-1 for her act of ommissions & commissions in respect of Gold 250gms valued at Rs.11,20,266/ - under Section 112(a), Section 112( b) and 114AA of the Customs Act, 1962. vi) I impose a penalty of Rs.40,000/-( Rupees Forty Thousand only) upon the Pax-2, for her acts of ommissions & commissions in respect of Gold 100 gms valued at Rs.4,48,107 / - under Section 112(a), Section 112 (b) and 114AA of the Customs Act, 1962. vii) 1 impose a penalty of Rs.20,000/- ( Rupees Twenty Thousand only) upon the Pax-3, for his act of ommissions & commissions in respect of Gold 51 gms valued at Rs.2,28,534/ - under Section 112(a), Section 112( b) and 114AA of the Customs Act, 1962.”

10. On 19th July 2023, another representation is stated to have been filed by the Petitioners’ Counsel, requesting the redemption of the gold jewellery of the Petitioners (hereinafter ‘second representation’).

11. Additionally, along with the second representation, the cancelled cheques were also submitted by the Petitioners. However, thereafter, the Petitioners were informed that the gold jewellery had been disposed of. Surprisingly, the OIO neither recorded that the gold jewellery had been disposed of.

12. The Petitioners then sought a refund of the amount, which was also rejected by the Customs Department, on the ground of limitation vide the refund order dated 26th March 2025, passed by the Assistant Commissioner (Refund) (hereinafter ‘refund order’). The discussion and findings in the refund order is as under: “Discussion & Findings

9. I have carefully gone through the case and documents available on record in case of Ms. Puja Jayant(D.O.B 04.03.1992), Ms Manisha Shastri (D.O.B 22.08.1994) and Mr. Jayant Shastri (D.O.B 10.03.1991). I have also perused the OIO passed by the Additional Commissioner of Customs, Terminal-3, IGI Airport, New Delhi. Therefore, the Pax-wise refund calculation is reflected in the table below: - Refund calculation in respect of Pax-1, Ms. Puja Jayant (D.O.B 04.03.1992): -

10. I find that the applicant has claimed refund of the sale proceeds under the Customs Act, 1962, after deducting Redemption Fine and Penalty. On going through the records, I find that though the redemption fine and penalty has not been paid by the applicant within a period of one hundred and twenty days from the date of passing of Order- in Original NO. 93/Adj/2023 dated 01.05.2023 as required under Section 125 of the Customs Act, 1962. The applicant had made an application dated 08.11.2024 for re- export of the goods in terms of the Order -in Original No. 93/Adj/2023 dated 01.05.2023. I find that the request for re-export was made by the Pax(s) after lapse of 120 days from the date of OIO. The Paxs had claimed refund under Section 150. However, Section 150 applies to goods which are not confiscated. For goods which are confiscated, redemption is as per Section 125, which gives a time of 120 days in which the Pax ( s) has to accept the offer of redemption. If offer of redemption is not acceptable within this period, the offer becomes void, and the confiscation becomes absolute. In such cases, the goods vest with the Central Government, and upon their disposal, the sale proceeds also vest with the Central Government. The present case squarely falls in this category, hence refund is liable to rejected.

102. I therefore hold that the offer of redemption granted by the Adjudicating Authority u/s 125 had lapsed and the goods had become vested with the Government. Accordingly, I pass the following order: ORDER In view of the above, the claimant has not paid the redemption fine and penalty within the stipulated time provided vide Orderin-Original No.93/Adj/2023 dated 01.05.2023. I therefore, reject the refund claim filed by the the applicants.”