Confiscation of seized gold and denial of redemption held to raise questions of fact, not referable

The Tribunal's findings on absolute confiscation of seized primary gold and denial of redemption were treated as factual determinations based on the evidence of possession, purity, and the rejected explanation that the gold came from old ornaments. Because the conclusions turned on appreciation of the record rather than any independent legal principle, the proposed reference under Section 82B of the Gold (Control) Act, 1968 was held not maintainable. The questions framed were therefore characterised as questions of fact and not referable to the High Court.

---

---

Issues: Whether the Tribunal's finding upholding absolute confiscation of seized gold and denial of redemption option gave rise to referable questions of law under Section 82B of the Gold (Control) Act, 1968.

Analysis: The Tribunal's conclusion rested on appreciation of the evidence regarding the nature and purity of the seized primary gold, the explanation offered for its possession, and the inference that the gold could not have been obtained from old ornaments as claimed. The rejection of the applicant's case, the acceptance of the confiscability of the gold, and the denial of redemption were all based on factual findings drawn from the record. Such findings did not disclose any independent question of law requiring reference to the High Court.

Conclusion: The questions proposed were held to be questions of fact and not referable.

---