Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether, for the purpose of making a declaration under section 16 of the Gold (Control) Act, 1968, a person's personal holdings of gold ornaments could be clubbed with ornaments held by him in another capacity, so as to require a declaration and justify confiscation and penalty.
Analysis: Section 16(1) and section 16(3) require declarations only when the quantity held in the relevant capacity exceeds the prescribed limit. The scheme of section 16(2), section 16(5) and section 16(7) shows that the Act contemplates holdings in different legal capacities and does not direct that ornaments held personally be aggregated with ornaments held for others in the capacity of a pledgee or pawnee. The residuary clause in section 16(2) covers such other capacities, and the exemption limits in section 16(5) apply separately to each capacity. The language of section 16(7) also supports the view that separate capacities are to be recognised for declaration purposes, and the administrative trade notice could not override the statute.
Conclusion: The holdings could not be clubbed together. No declaration was required on the facts, and the confiscation and penalty orders were unsustainable.
Ratio Decidendi: Where a statute regulating declarations of gold holdings recognises ownership or possession in different legal capacities, the quantities held in each capacity are to be assessed separately unless the statute expressly provides for aggregation.