https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=409575 Repleal of the Gold (Control) Act, 1968 did not revive a claim for return of gold already confiscated and for which the conviction and confiscation order had long attained finality. Section 6 of the General Clauses Act, 1897 preserved the prior operation of the repealed Act and the consequences already incurred, while the repeal contained no saving clause or contrary legislative direction requiring restitution of seized gold. The petitioners' relied-on precedent was distinguished on its facts and exceptional context. The petition was therefore held not maintainable on the ground urged, and the prayer for return of the gold was rejected. en-us Wed, 24 Mar 2021 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 12 Jul 2021 11:01:28 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=409575 Repleal of the Gold (Control) Act, 1968 did not revive a claim for return of gold already confiscated and for which the conviction and confiscation order had long attained finality. Section 6 of the General Clauses Act, 1897 preserved the prior operation of the repealed Act and the consequences already incurred, while the repeal contained no saving clause or contrary legislative direction requiring restitution of seized gold. The petitioners' relied-on precedent was distinguished on its facts and exceptional context. The petition was therefore held not maintainable on the ground urged, and the prayer for return of the gold was rejected. Case-Laws Customs Wed, 24 Mar 2021 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=409575