https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=272442 Under Section 79 of the Gold (Control) Act, 1968, written notice to initiate confiscation proceedings had to be given within six months of seizure, and mere despatch was insufficient unless the notice reached or was tendered to the person concerned. Applying the same principle as under analogous customs provisions, the Orissa HC held that failure to serve notice within the statutory period triggered the vested right to return of the seized gold under the second proviso. As no notice was shown to have been received or tendered within six months, the confiscation, appellate and revisional orders were quashed and return of the seized articles was directed. en-us Mon, 03 May 1982 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 03 May 2018 15:10:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=272442 Under Section 79 of the Gold (Control) Act, 1968, written notice to initiate confiscation proceedings had to be given within six months of seizure, and mere despatch was insufficient unless the notice reached or was tendered to the person concerned. Applying the same principle as under analogous customs provisions, the Orissa HC held that failure to serve notice within the statutory period triggered the vested right to return of the seized gold under the second proviso. As no notice was shown to have been received or tendered within six months, the confiscation, appellate and revisional orders were quashed and return of the seized articles was directed. Case-Laws Customs Mon, 03 May 1982 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=272442