Binod Kumar Verma vs. Commissioner Of Customs
Held
The Court held that the Order-in-Appeal dated June 27, 2025, deserves to be given effect to. The reasoning was based on the fact that the Appellate Authority had found, after verification of invoices and bank accounts, that the gold items were genuinely purchased within India and not acquired from overseas. Consequently, no customs duty was payable. The Court noted that a Revision Petition filed against this Order-in-Appeal had been dismissed on December 12, 2025. The Court directed the Petitioner to appear before the Customs Department on December 29, 2025, at 11:00 AM, where a nodal officer would assist in the release of the goods. Furthermore, the Court ordered that no warehousing charges would be levied from the date of the Order-in-Appeal (June 27, 2025) until the date of release, considering the accumulation of such charges.
Facts
The Petitioner, Binod Kumar Verma, filed a writ petition seeking implementation of an Order-in-Appeal dated June 27, 2025. The Petitioner was intercepted on July 12, 2024, upon arrival at Indira Gandhi International Airport, New Delhi, and two gold items (a kada weighing 110 grams and a ring weighing 40 grams) were seized. An Order-in-Original dated July 25, 2024, directed absolute confiscation of the goods and imposed a penalty of Rs. 1 Lakh on the Petitioner. The Petitioner was permitted to file an appeal by a previous order of the High Court. The Order-in-Appeal allowed the release of the goods without payment of customs duty or penalty, finding them to be of Indian origin. A subsequent Revision Petition against the Order-in-Appeal was dismissed on December 12, 2025.
Key Issues
1. Whether the Order-in-Appeal dated June 27, 2025, directing the release of the seized gold items, should be implemented by the Respondent (Commissioner of Customs)? Petitioner's arguments: The Petitioner contended that the Order-in-Appeal, which found the seized gold items to be of Indian origin and thus not liable for customs duty or confiscation, is binding and needs to be implemented. The Petitioner highlighted that a subsequent Revision Petition filed by the Revenue against this order has been dismissed. Respondent's arguments: The judgment does not record any specific arguments made by the Respondent. However, the context implies the Respondent's initial action of confiscation and penalty, and the subsequent filing of a Revision Petition, indicate a disagreement with the appellate authority's findings.
Sections Cited
Not specified
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
O R D E R
%
2025
This hearing has been done through hybrid mode.
The present Petition has been filed by the Petitioner-Binod Kumar Verma under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, inter alia, seeking implementation of the Order-in-Appeal dated 27th June, 2025 passed by the Office of the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals).
A perusal of the present Petition would show that the Petitioner had travelled to Bangkok and was returning back to India on 12th July, 2024 via flight no. TG315. Upon his arrival at the Indira Gandhi International Airport, New Delhi, the Petitioner was intercepted by the concerned officials of the Customs Department and the following gold items, which were being worn by the Petitioner, were seized by the Customs D
The judgment continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full GST judgments a month (one account works on both bharattax.net and this site). Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
Reproduced from the public record of the Delhi High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.