https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=41640 A suo motu revisional show cause notice under the Gold (Control) Act is ordinarily not interfered with under Article 226 unless it is shown to be without jurisdiction or time-barred, and the fact that the Collector communicated with the Government did not by itself invalidate the initiation. The explanation to the second proviso to Section 79 applies only where remand or fresh adjudication is ordered, so it does not create an unconditional right to return of seized gold during every revisional process. Where the Government has stayed the administrator's order, the original proceedings remain suspended and return of the gold is not justified at that stage. en-us Wed, 23 Mar 1983 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 05 Jun 2010 10:53:15 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=41640 A suo motu revisional show cause notice under the Gold (Control) Act is ordinarily not interfered with under Article 226 unless it is shown to be without jurisdiction or time-barred, and the fact that the Collector communicated with the Government did not by itself invalidate the initiation. The explanation to the second proviso to Section 79 applies only where remand or fresh adjudication is ordered, so it does not create an unconditional right to return of seized gold during every revisional process. Where the Government has stayed the administrator's order, the original proceedings remain suspended and return of the gold is not justified at that stage. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 23 Mar 1983 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=41640