https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=166688 Primary gold could not be shielded from confiscation under the proviso to Section 71(1) of the Gold (Control) Act, 1968 where its possession was itself prohibited and it had already become liable to confiscation by statute. The proviso was confined to cases where a third person's act or omission made the gold confiscable, but lawful retention would otherwise have been possible. Notice under Section 79 was also sufficient because it was served on the persons from whose possession the gold was seized and who were concerned with it, even though later ownership was asserted in minors under an alleged will. The confiscation was therefore upheld and the writ challenge failed. en-us Sat, 10 Dec 1983 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 31 Oct 2014 10:19:58 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=166688 Primary gold could not be shielded from confiscation under the proviso to Section 71(1) of the Gold (Control) Act, 1968 where its possession was itself prohibited and it had already become liable to confiscation by statute. The proviso was confined to cases where a third person's act or omission made the gold confiscable, but lawful retention would otherwise have been possible. Notice under Section 79 was also sufficient because it was served on the persons from whose possession the gold was seized and who were concerned with it, even though later ownership was asserted in minors under an alleged will. The confiscation was therefore upheld and the writ challenge failed. Case-Laws Customs Sat, 10 Dec 1983 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=166688