https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=80081 A charge under the gold-control law failed where the show-cause notice did not allege the precise contravention ultimately relied on and the material did not prove that the appellant was a licensed gold dealer. A solitary attempt to sell ornaments was insufficient to establish carrying on business in gold, which requires a course of transactions rather than a stray act. Refusal of cross-examination, despite dispute over the seizure panchnama and witnesses, breached natural justice. As the confiscation order lacked a valid foundation and was procedurally unfair, the redemption fine and penalty also could not stand, and the seized ornaments were directed to be released. en-us Wed, 13 Sep 1989 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 14 Jun 2011 15:47:32 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=80081 A charge under the gold-control law failed where the show-cause notice did not allege the precise contravention ultimately relied on and the material did not prove that the appellant was a licensed gold dealer. A solitary attempt to sell ornaments was insufficient to establish carrying on business in gold, which requires a course of transactions rather than a stray act. Refusal of cross-examination, despite dispute over the seizure panchnama and witnesses, breached natural justice. As the confiscation order lacked a valid foundation and was procedurally unfair, the redemption fine and penalty also could not stand, and the seized ornaments were directed to be released. Case-Laws Customs Wed, 13 Sep 1989 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=80081