Unaccounted gold stock and belated explanations can justify confiscation, redemption fine, and penalty when records are lacking.

Unaccounted gold ornaments found in licensed premises were liable to confiscation where the explanation that part of the stock came from purchases or customer repairs was not contemporaneously disclosed and was unsupported by credible vouchers, affidavits, repair records, or proper accounting. Failure to maintain the required repair register and the inconsistency of the later explanation with the surrounding circumstances supported the finding that it was an afterthought. On that basis, the redemption fine and penalty were also sustained as proportionate to the breach, and the confiscation with monetary sanctions remained in force.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether confiscation of the seized gold ornaments was justified on the facts and evidence; (ii) Whether the redemption fine and penalty imposed were excessive or unwarranted.

Issue (i): Whether confiscation of the seized gold ornaments was justified on the facts and evidence.

Analysis: The excess gold ornaments were found in the licensed premises on the date of search. The explanation that part of the stock represented purchases made through the appellant and his brothers, or gold received from customers for repairs, was not contemporaneously disclosed at the time of seizure or in the subsequent statement. The supporting vouchers, affidavits, claims of customers, and repair records were not produced in a credible manner, and the later explanation was found inconsistent with the appellant's conduct and the surrounding circumstances. The absence of proper accounting and the failure to maintain the required repair register supported the inference that the explanation was an afterthought.

Conclusion: Confiscation of the seized gold ornaments was upheld.

Issue (ii): Whether the redemption fine and penalty imposed were excessive or unwarranted.

Analysis: The value of the seized gold was substantial, the stock remained unaccounted, statutory record-keeping was not complied with, and the explanation offered later was not accepted. In those circumstances, the monetary consequences imposed by the adjudicating authority were found proportionate to the gravity of the breach.

Conclusion: The redemption fine and penalty were sustained.

Final Conclusion: The appeal did not succeed, and the confiscation together with the monetary sanctions remained in force.

Ratio Decidendi: Where seized precious metal stock is found unaccounted and the belated explanation is unsupported by contemporaneous disclosure or reliable records, confiscation and consequential monetary penalties may be sustained.

---