https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=41784 Where confiscated property is later ordered to be restored and cannot be returned in specie, restitution is measured by the market value prevailing on the date the confiscation is annulled. The Court treated the recall of confiscation as fixing the point at which the owner's position had to be restored, and rejected reliance on the original seizure date. It also held that section 144 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, did not govern such confiscation matters. In the absence of proof that the gold had been validly disposed of or sold, the Government was required to return equivalent gold or pay its value as on the date of reconsideration. en-us Thu, 17 Jul 1986 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 07 Jun 2010 10:44:34 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=41784 Where confiscated property is later ordered to be restored and cannot be returned in specie, restitution is measured by the market value prevailing on the date the confiscation is annulled. The Court treated the recall of confiscation as fixing the point at which the owner's position had to be restored, and rejected reliance on the original seizure date. It also held that section 144 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, did not govern such confiscation matters. In the absence of proof that the gold had been validly disposed of or sold, the Government was required to return equivalent gold or pay its value as on the date of reconsideration. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 17 Jul 1986 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=41784