https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=74262 A de novo adjudication under the Gold (Control) Act was held not to become invalid merely because the fresh notice was issued after six months from the remand order, as limitation was linked to the communication and effect of the remand rather than treated as voiding the proceedings. On confiscation, concealed possession of primary gold, corroborated statements, travel records, and surrounding circumstances were treated as sufficient to establish illicit movement and possession, so absolute confiscation was sustained and redemption denied. The personal penalties, however, were considered excessive in light of the appellants' relative role and were reduced. en-us Fri, 19 Aug 1988 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 01 Feb 2012 17:38:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=74262 A de novo adjudication under the Gold (Control) Act was held not to become invalid merely because the fresh notice was issued after six months from the remand order, as limitation was linked to the communication and effect of the remand rather than treated as voiding the proceedings. On confiscation, concealed possession of primary gold, corroborated statements, travel records, and surrounding circumstances were treated as sufficient to establish illicit movement and possession, so absolute confiscation was sustained and redemption denied. The personal penalties, however, were considered excessive in light of the appellants' relative role and were reduced. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 19 Aug 1988 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=74262