Question of law depends on legal interpretation, not mere evidence; statutory register objections alone do not create a referable issue.

Whether a GS.13 register objection raised a referable question of law depended on appreciation of evidence: the Tribunal treated the entries, delayed photocopies, lack of supporting testimony, and the appellant's own statements as factual matters, and held that the register carried no presumption of correctness, so the objection was not referable. Whether a proved contravention could be converted from one sub-section to another under the same section was treated as a legal issue concerning the permissibility of that conversion under the Gold (Control) Act, and was therefore required to be referred to the High Court. The reference thus succeeded only on the conversion question.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the objection based on the GS.13 register raised a referable question of law. (ii) Whether the question whether a proved contravention could be converted from one sub-section to another under the same section was required to be referred to the High Court.

Issue (i): Whether the objection based on the GS.13 register raised a referable question of law.

Analysis: The Tribunal treated the GS.13 entries, the delayed production of photocopies, the absence of supporting testimony from the alleged goldsmiths, the absence of claims by them or their customers, and the appellant's own statements as matters going to the appreciation of evidence. It held that the statutory register did not carry a presumption of correctness and that the question whether those entries should be accepted depended on the totality of evidence on record.

Conclusion: The objection did not raise a question of law and was not referable.

Issue (ii): Whether the question whether a proved contravention could be converted from one sub-section to another under the same section was required to be referred to the High Court.

Analysis: The Tribunal treated the issue as one arising from its earlier order on the legal effect of converting the established breach from one sub-section to another under the same section. Since the issue concerned the legal permissibility of such conversion under the Gold (Control) Act, it was regarded as a question of law arising from the order.

Conclusion: The question was required to be referred to the High Court.

Final Conclusion: The reference application succeeded only to the extent of the conversion issue, while the challenge based on the GS.13 register was rejected as not raising a question of law.

Ratio Decidendi: Whether a matter raises a referable question of law depends on whether it turns on legal interpretation rather than mere appreciation of evidence; statutory records without a prescribed presumption of correctness do not, by themselves, convert a factual dispute into a question of law.

---