https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=80203 Where lawful acquisition of gold ornaments was supported by contemporaneous vouchers and affidavit evidence, a technical defect in statutory entries did not by itself justify confiscation under the Gold (Control) Act. The absence of detailed identification in the panchnama did not invalidate seizure because the excess ornaments had been segregated and the defence record supported their separate treatment. On the evidence, the acquisition was accepted as genuine, confiscation was set aside, and only a reduced penalty was sustained for breach of control requirements. en-us Sun, 27 Aug 1989 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 15 Jun 2011 13:33:22 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=80203 Where lawful acquisition of gold ornaments was supported by contemporaneous vouchers and affidavit evidence, a technical defect in statutory entries did not by itself justify confiscation under the Gold (Control) Act. The absence of detailed identification in the panchnama did not invalidate seizure because the excess ornaments had been segregated and the defence record supported their separate treatment. On the evidence, the acquisition was accepted as genuine, confiscation was set aside, and only a reduced penalty was sustained for breach of control requirements. Case-Laws Customs Sun, 27 Aug 1989 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=80203