https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=73187 The Tribunal's rejection of competing ownership claims to seized gold was treated as a factual finding based on the evidence and surrounding circumstances, so no question of law arose. A certified goldsmith's entitlement to possess primary gold under the Gold (Control) Act was held to be subject to the statutory restrictions on acquisition, possession and use, and not an unrestricted right; no referable legal issue arose on that point. The Tribunal's fixation of redemption fine and penalty was a matter of discretion, interferable only if patently perverse or arbitrary, and its reliance on the appellant's statement was supported by other circumstances and treated as voluntary and trustworthy. The refusal to refer the questions was therefore upheld. en-us Fri, 10 Jul 1987 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 30 May 2011 11:26:39 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=73187 The Tribunal's rejection of competing ownership claims to seized gold was treated as a factual finding based on the evidence and surrounding circumstances, so no question of law arose. A certified goldsmith's entitlement to possess primary gold under the Gold (Control) Act was held to be subject to the statutory restrictions on acquisition, possession and use, and not an unrestricted right; no referable legal issue arose on that point. The Tribunal's fixation of redemption fine and penalty was a matter of discretion, interferable only if patently perverse or arbitrary, and its reliance on the appellant's statement was supported by other circumstances and treated as voluntary and trustworthy. The refusal to refer the questions was therefore upheld. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 10 Jul 1987 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=73187