https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=73369 Questions sought under Section 82B of the Gold (Control) Act were held to be framed from findings of fact and appreciation of evidence, not from referable questions of law. The objection on the panchnama failed because that point had not been urged in the appeal and the document was relied on only as evidence of seizure. The challenge to the Section 108 Customs Act statement also failed because the appellate order found no proof of coercion and treated the statement as admissible. The proposed issue on penalty likewise depended on the overall evidence of guilty knowledge, so the reference application was not maintainable. en-us Mon, 13 Jul 1987 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 27 Jan 2012 18:25:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=73369 Questions sought under Section 82B of the Gold (Control) Act were held to be framed from findings of fact and appreciation of evidence, not from referable questions of law. The objection on the panchnama failed because that point had not been urged in the appeal and the document was relied on only as evidence of seizure. The challenge to the Section 108 Customs Act statement also failed because the appellate order found no proof of coercion and treated the statement as admissible. The proposed issue on penalty likewise depended on the overall evidence of guilty knowledge, so the reference application was not maintainable. Case-Laws Customs Mon, 13 Jul 1987 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=73369