https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=36232 Seized gold, gold ornaments and diamond jewellery retained under income-tax seizure provisions did not transfer ownership to the Income-tax Officer; the assets remained the assessee's property until sale under the statutory recovery mechanism. Because the petitioner had not made the declaration required under the Gold (Control) Act, the gold and jewellery, being held beyond the permissible limit, remained liable to confiscation under that Act. The voluntary disclosure under the Voluntary Disclosure of Income and Wealth Ordinance, 1975 did not attract the claimed immunity. Accordingly, the other authority could proceed under the Gold (Control) Act, and the writ petition was unsustainable. en-us Thu, 24 Apr 1980 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 20 Mar 2010 11:55:03 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=36232 Seized gold, gold ornaments and diamond jewellery retained under income-tax seizure provisions did not transfer ownership to the Income-tax Officer; the assets remained the assessee's property until sale under the statutory recovery mechanism. Because the petitioner had not made the declaration required under the Gold (Control) Act, the gold and jewellery, being held beyond the permissible limit, remained liable to confiscation under that Act. The voluntary disclosure under the Voluntary Disclosure of Income and Wealth Ordinance, 1975 did not attract the claimed immunity. Accordingly, the other authority could proceed under the Gold (Control) Act, and the writ petition was unsustainable. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 24 Apr 1980 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=36232