<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>1971 (8) TMI 225 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=200156</link>
    <description>A licensed dealer&#039;s failure to update the prescribed gold account registers contemporaneously breached the statutory duty to maintain true and complete accounts, and the petitioner&#039;s explanation that vouchers existed did not cure that non-compliance. However, the seizure power under the gold control law was limited to gold in respect of which contravention was reasonably believed to exist, and could not extend to accounted ornaments or substitute stock where the specific offending items were not identified. The detention of the remaining ornaments was therefore held illegal and without jurisdiction, and writ relief was available notwithstanding alternative appellate or revisional remedies.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 10 Aug 1971 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 22 Mar 2018 13:26:57 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=514136" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1971 (8) TMI 225 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=200156</link>
      <description>A licensed dealer&#039;s failure to update the prescribed gold account registers contemporaneously breached the statutory duty to maintain true and complete accounts, and the petitioner&#039;s explanation that vouchers existed did not cure that non-compliance. However, the seizure power under the gold control law was limited to gold in respect of which contravention was reasonably believed to exist, and could not extend to accounted ornaments or substitute stock where the specific offending items were not identified. The detention of the remaining ornaments was therefore held illegal and without jurisdiction, and writ relief was available notwithstanding alternative appellate or revisional remedies.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 10 Aug 1971 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=200156</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>