Penalty quantum in gold control matters may rest on appellate discretion and not create a referable question of law.

Appellate reduction of penalty under the Gold (Control) Act was treated as a matter of judicial discretion, not a question of law, where the Tribunal had already confirmed contravention and relied on the factual record to reduce the penalty from Rs. 10,000 to Rs. 9,000. The reasoning stated that once the finding of violation stood, the quantum of penalty was within the Tribunal's appellate discretion, especially when the reduction was supported by reasons drawn from the evidence. On that basis, the reference application was rejected because it disclosed no referable question of law.

---

---

Issues: Whether the Tribunal's reduction of penalty in exercise of appellate discretion on the facts of the case gave rise to a question of law warranting reference under the Gold (Control) Act, 1968.

Analysis: The application sought a reference on the ground that, after the Tribunal found that the appellant was concerned only with a smaller part of the seized gold, the penalty ought to have been reduced proportionately. The order held that in an appeal the entire matter is at large, and once the finding of contravention was confirmed, the quantum of penalty lay within the Tribunal's judicial discretion. The reduction from Rs. 10,000 to Rs. 9,000 was supported by reasons and rested on the factual material before the Tribunal. Such an exercise of discretion did not create a referable question of law.

Conclusion: The reference application did not disclose any question of law and was rejected.

---