Appellate competence under the Gold Control Act upheld; de novo remand was set aside to avoid conflicting decisions.

The Gold (Control) Act, 1968 treated "Collector (Appeals)" as including the Collector of Customs (Appeals), and the appellate scheme under section 4 supported that authority's competence to hear Gold Control matters. Existing notification and departmental circulars were read as consistent with that position, so the change in nomenclature did not defeat appellate jurisdiction. Even if a separate forum were contemplated, the proper course was to require the party to invoke the correct remedy, not to set aside the adjudication and direct de novo proceedings. The risk of conflicting determinations under the Customs Act, 1962 and the Gold (Control) Act, 1968 also favoured disposal by the same authority.

---

---

Issues: Whether the Collector of Customs (Appeals) was competent to hear and dispose of an appeal arising under the Gold (Control) Act, 1968, and whether the lower appellate authority was justified in setting aside the original adjudication and directing de novo consideration with separate appealable orders.

Analysis: The Gold (Control) Act, 1968 defined "Collector (Appeals)" so as to include a Collector of Customs (Appeals), and the statutory scheme under section 4 contemplated notification and appointment of the appellate authority for purposes of enforcement of the Act. The existing notification and departmental circular were treated as supporting the position that the change in nomenclature did not affect the appellate competence already available. Even assuming a separate appellate forum were required, the proper course would have been to direct the party to pursue the correct appellate remedy, not to set aside the adjudication and order a fresh de novo decision. The possibility of conflicting decisions on the same transaction under the Customs Act, 1962 and the Gold (Control) Act, 1968 also supported disposal by the same authority.

Conclusion: The Collector of Customs (Appeals) was held competent to decide the Gold Control aspect, and the order remanding the matter for de novo adjudication was set aside in favour of the Revenue.

---