https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=167549 Primary gold under the Gold (Control) Act, 1968 remained subject to a strict statutory prohibition, and reliance on declaration provisions did not create a general right to own, possess, or retain it. The claimant must first prove a legally cognizable title or enforceable interest in the seized gold; without documentary or credible oral proof, a challenge to confiscation cannot be maintained. The court also treated unexplained delay and failure to exhaust available appeal and revision remedies as additional grounds against writ relief. On that basis, the confiscation and penalty orders were upheld and interference was declined. en-us Mon, 07 Oct 1985 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 24 Dec 2014 11:32:43 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=167549 Primary gold under the Gold (Control) Act, 1968 remained subject to a strict statutory prohibition, and reliance on declaration provisions did not create a general right to own, possess, or retain it. The claimant must first prove a legally cognizable title or enforceable interest in the seized gold; without documentary or credible oral proof, a challenge to confiscation cannot be maintained. The court also treated unexplained delay and failure to exhaust available appeal and revision remedies as additional grounds against writ relief. On that basis, the confiscation and penalty orders were upheld and interference was declined. Case-Laws Customs Mon, 07 Oct 1985 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=167549