https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=45420 Criminal acquittal in a prosecution under the Gold (Control) Act does not, by itself, bar independent penalty proceedings before the statutory authority, because the two proceedings are distinct in nature, forum and procedure; issue estoppel and res judicata are therefore inapplicable on the stated facts. The commentary also states that penalty under section 74 can be imposed even where no gold is actually seized or recovered, since the provision contemplates liability despite non-availability of the goods for confiscation. On the described facts, contravention could be established from account books, the assessee's statement and other material, so physical recovery was not a precondition to penalty. en-us Fri, 21 Jan 2000 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 10 Jul 2010 13:46:10 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=45420 Criminal acquittal in a prosecution under the Gold (Control) Act does not, by itself, bar independent penalty proceedings before the statutory authority, because the two proceedings are distinct in nature, forum and procedure; issue estoppel and res judicata are therefore inapplicable on the stated facts. The commentary also states that penalty under section 74 can be imposed even where no gold is actually seized or recovered, since the provision contemplates liability despite non-availability of the goods for confiscation. On the described facts, contravention could be established from account books, the assessee's statement and other material, so physical recovery was not a precondition to penalty. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 21 Jan 2000 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=45420