Delhi High Court Imposes Costs On Party For Misrepresenting New Gold Jewellery As 'Old'; Orders Release Subject To Payment Of Duty

The Delhi High Court has imposed costs on two Petitioners who falsely claimed that their old gold jewellery was seized by the Customs Department upon their arrival from Dubai.On production of the gold items before it, a division bench of Justices Prathiba M. Singh and Renu Bhatnagar observed,“it is clear that the gold items are not used gold jewellery of the Petitioners, and the same are absolutely brand new jewellery, which is stated to have been purchased by the Petitioners in Dubai and were being brought to India.”For context, Baggage Rules 2016 exempt personal jewellery of an air traveller from customs duty payable on import of gold.The Petitioners were returning from Dubai with one gold kada weighing a total of 200 grams, which came to be seized by the Customs. They claimed it to be a personal effect— old jewellery being worn by them.Accordingly, the Court had directed the gold items to be produced before it.Petitioners submitted that no show cause notice was issued to them. Reliance was placed on Union of India & Anr. v. Jatin Ahuja (2025) where the Supreme Court held that failure to issue a show-cause notice within time prescribed under the Customs Act, 1962 entitles the person to release of the seized goods.In this backdrop, the High Court observed that one year period itself has elapsed and no SCN can be issued at this stage. As such, the seized gold items are liable to be released to the Petitioners subject to payment of entire applicable Customs duty.However, “since the Petitioners have given an impression that the detained gold items are old jewellery of the Petitioners, which is clearly not correct, upon a perusal of the said jewellery, costs of Rs. 10,000/- in each of the petitions is imposed on the Petitioners,” the Court ordered.The costs shall be deposited with the Delhi High Court Bar Clerk Association.Appearance: Ms. Richa Kumar , Mr. Pawan, Mr. Yatin Bhutani, Mr. Tarun Gulia, Mr. Aman Agarwal and Mr. Prashant Chaudhary, Advs. for Petitioners; Mr. Akash Verma, Sr. Standing Counsel, with Ms. Aanchal Uppal, Adv. for RespondentCase title: Sanchit Gupta v. Commissioner Of Customs (and connected matter)Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1641Case no.: W.P.(C) 10380/2025 (and connected matter)Click here to read order

Delhi High Court Imposes Costs On Party For Misrepresenting New Gold Jewellery As 'Old'; Orders Release Subject To Payment Of Duty

Kapil Dhyani

Tags