https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=73415 Under the Gold Control Act, seizure from a person's possession justified notice to that person, but possession and notice did not make him the conclusive owner of the gold ornaments. Where the adjudicating authority accepted that the ornaments belonged to other persons, it could not finally determine title to the seized property, and competing claims had to be resolved by a civil court. The proviso to Section 71(1) supported release to the true owner where the act or omission was not that of the owner. On that basis, release to the appellant on presumed ownership was refused and the departmental refusal was upheld. en-us Wed, 04 Nov 1987 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 27 Jan 2012 18:28:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=73415 Under the Gold Control Act, seizure from a person's possession justified notice to that person, but possession and notice did not make him the conclusive owner of the gold ornaments. Where the adjudicating authority accepted that the ornaments belonged to other persons, it could not finally determine title to the seized property, and competing claims had to be resolved by a civil court. The proviso to Section 71(1) supported release to the true owner where the act or omission was not that of the owner. On that basis, release to the appellant on presumed ownership was refused and the departmental refusal was upheld. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 04 Nov 1987 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=73415