https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=73156 Under the Gold (Control) Act, liability to make a declaration depended on whether the appellant had exclusive possession, custody or control of ornaments beyond the permissible limit. The statutory definition of "family" was confined to the husband, wife and minor children, or any two or more of them, so separate household units living in the same house were not treated as one family for this purpose. As the record showed different members' ownership, ornaments recovered from different parts of the house, and no proof of exclusive control by the appellant, the declaration obligation could not be fastened on him. Confiscation, redemption fine and penalty were therefore unsustainable. en-us Fri, 12 Jun 1987 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 27 Jan 2012 18:13:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=73156 Under the Gold (Control) Act, liability to make a declaration depended on whether the appellant had exclusive possession, custody or control of ornaments beyond the permissible limit. The statutory definition of "family" was confined to the husband, wife and minor children, or any two or more of them, so separate household units living in the same house were not treated as one family for this purpose. As the record showed different members' ownership, ornaments recovered from different parts of the house, and no proof of exclusive control by the appellant, the declaration obligation could not be fastened on him. Confiscation, redemption fine and penalty were therefore unsustainable. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 12 Jun 1987 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=73156