https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=167549 The court upheld the confiscation of 16 gold bars, an Exide battery, and a motor cycle under the Gold (Control) Act, 1968, as the petitioners failed to prove their claim to the seized gold. Despite alleging the gold was ancestral property, they lacked evidence and support from other claimants. The court ruled their possession of primary gold was illegal, as per the Act's provisions. Additionally, the petitioners' delay in seeking legal recourse led to the dismissal of their writ petitions due to laches, with costs imposed on them. 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 The court upheld the confiscation of 16 gold bars, an Exide battery, and a motor cycle under the Gold (Control) Act, 1968, as the petitioners failed to prove their claim to the seized gold. Despite alleging the gold was ancestral property, they lacked evidence and support from other claimants. The court ruled their possession of primary gold was illegal, as per the Act's provisions. Additionally, the petitioners' delay in seeking legal recourse led to the dismissal of their writ petitions due to laches, with costs imposed on them. Case-Laws Customs Mon, 07 Oct 1985 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=167549