https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=80102 Where receipt of gold ornaments and primary gold was proved by vouchers and supporting statements, a short delay in making contemporaneous statutory entries under the Gold Control law was treated as a technical breach only. Because there was no allegation of clandestine disposal or smuggled origin, confiscation was not justified on these facts and was set aside. Penalty was considered permissible only to the extent warranted by the nature of the lapse, and it was therefore reduced to a nominal amount. en-us Wed, 19 Mar 1986 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 14 Jun 2011 18:01:32 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=80102 Where receipt of gold ornaments and primary gold was proved by vouchers and supporting statements, a short delay in making contemporaneous statutory entries under the Gold Control law was treated as a technical breach only. Because there was no allegation of clandestine disposal or smuggled origin, confiscation was not justified on these facts and was set aside. Penalty was considered permissible only to the extent warranted by the nature of the lapse, and it was therefore reduced to a nominal amount. Case-Laws Customs Wed, 19 Mar 1986 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=80102