TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Interpretation of Gold Control Act: Acquiring, Declaring, and Possessing Gold Articles</h1> The court interpreted Sections 8(3) and 16(3) of the Gold Control Act, 1968, addressing acquisition and declaration of gold articles. It applied Section ... confiscation - Declaration by a minor Issues:1. Interpretation of Sections 8(3) and 16(3) of the Gold Control Act, 1968.2. Application of Section 71 of the Gold Control Act.3. Confiscation and penalties under the Gold Control Act.4. Liability of the minor in possession of gold articles.5. Imposition of penalties and confiscation of gold articles.Detailed Analysis:1. The judgment involves the interpretation of Sections 8(3) and 16(3) of the Gold Control Act, 1968. Section 8(3) prohibits the acquisition of gold articles except by succession, intestate, or testamentary, while Section 16(3) mandates that any person acquiring gold in excess of specified quantities must make a declaration within a prescribed period.2. The application of Section 71 of the Gold Control Act is crucial in this case. Section 71 deals with confiscation of gold articles in case of contravention of the Act. The proviso to Section 71 states that if it is proven that the gold belongs to a person other than the one who rendered it liable for confiscation, confiscation may not be ordered, but penalties can be imposed.3. The judgment delves into the provisions of confiscation and penalties under the Gold Control Act. It highlights that any person in possession of gold exceeding the permissible limit without declaration may face confiscation and penalties under the Act.4. The liability of the minor in possession of the gold articles is a significant aspect of the judgment. It is established that the minor was the owner of the articles received as gifts, and the minor could not be held accountable for the contravention of the Gold Control Act.5. The judgment addresses the imposition of penalties and confiscation of the gold articles. It concludes that the gold articles, being owned by the minor, are not liable for confiscation. However, a penalty is imposed under Section 75 of the Act, which is to be recovered from the guardian as the minor is not responsible for the contravention.In conclusion, the judgment emphasizes the importance of adhering to the provisions of the Gold Control Act, distinguishes ownership of the gold articles, and upholds the imposition of penalties while ruling out confiscation in the case involving a minor in possession of the articles.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
