https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=80480 Confiscation under the Gold (Control) Act could not be sustained against a claimant who was not given statutory notice and a reasonable opportunity to be heard. The court explained that civil jurisdiction is not ordinarily excluded where the statutory process is not followed or fundamental procedural safeguards are breached, but the civil court may only examine legality of the process and not sit in appeal on the merits. Because notice was required to the owner or person concerned, notice only to the possessor was insufficient where ownership was disputed. The general good-faith protection also failed because action taken in breach of the statutory notice requirement cannot be treated as protected conduct. en-us Tue, 17 Oct 1989 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 17 Jun 2011 12:03:56 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=80480 Confiscation under the Gold (Control) Act could not be sustained against a claimant who was not given statutory notice and a reasonable opportunity to be heard. The court explained that civil jurisdiction is not ordinarily excluded where the statutory process is not followed or fundamental procedural safeguards are breached, but the civil court may only examine legality of the process and not sit in appeal on the merits. Because notice was required to the owner or person concerned, notice only to the possessor was insufficient where ownership was disputed. The general good-faith protection also failed because action taken in breach of the statutory notice requirement cannot be treated as protected conduct. Case-Laws Customs Tue, 17 Oct 1989 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=80480