TaxTMI Login
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%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Join Channel
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: (i) whether the petitioners were entitled to an option to redeem the confiscated gold on payment of redemption fine; (ii) whether the writ petition was entertainable notwithstanding the pending reference remedy.
Issue (i): whether the petitioners were entitled to an option to redeem the confiscated gold on payment of redemption fine.
Analysis: The confiscated gold was found to be ancestral in origin and not shown to be smuggled or of foreign origin. The Tribunal failed to consider the circular issued under the Gold (Control) Act, 1968 authorising adjudicating and appellate authorities to permit release of primary gold with or without fine in lieu of confiscation, subject to conversion into ornaments or sale to a licensed dealer. The record also showed an undertaking to comply with those conditions. The power to permit redemption was required to be exercised reasonably and not arbitrarily, and the Tribunal's refusal rested on unsustainable reasons.
Conclusion: The refusal to grant an option to redeem the confiscated gold was unsustainable and was set aside in favour of the petitioners.
Issue (ii): whether the writ petition was entertainable notwithstanding the pending reference remedy.
Analysis: The reference proceeding had not effectively progressed, and the alternative remedy was neither efficacious nor prompt. Since the petitioners undertook not to pursue the reference if relief was granted, the existence of that remedy did not bar writ jurisdiction in the circumstances.
Conclusion: The writ petition was maintainable and was entertained in favour of the petitioners.
Final Conclusion: The impugned orders were quashed to the extent they denied redemption, and the matter was directed to be processed so that the petitioners could redeem the seized gold on payment of redemption fine, with the authorities to act in accordance with the conditions specified by the Court.
Ratio Decidendi: Where the statute or administrative circular authorises release of confiscated primary gold on payment of fine, the discretion to grant redemption must be exercised reasonably and cannot be refused arbitrarily when the relevant conditions are capable of compliance.
TaxTMI 
