https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=72285 The proviso to section 71 of the Gold (Control) Act applies only where third-party ownership of seized gold is established to the adjudicating authority by an actual claimant, and the owner's absence of knowledge or connivance is also shown; on the stated facts, affidavits and a voucher produced through the appellants were insufficient, so notice to alleged third parties was not required. The discussion also notes that confiscation remained sustainable because the explanation of approval and repair receipts was unsupported by records and statutory record-keeping under section 55 and rule 13 was not maintained. Contravention supported penalty, but the penalty was moderated. en-us Tue, 04 Jun 1985 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 25 Jan 2012 16:52:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=72285 The proviso to section 71 of the Gold (Control) Act applies only where third-party ownership of seized gold is established to the adjudicating authority by an actual claimant, and the owner's absence of knowledge or connivance is also shown; on the stated facts, affidavits and a voucher produced through the appellants were insufficient, so notice to alleged third parties was not required. The discussion also notes that confiscation remained sustainable because the explanation of approval and repair receipts was unsupported by records and statutory record-keeping under section 55 and rule 13 was not maintained. Contravention supported penalty, but the penalty was moderated. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 04 Jun 1985 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=72285