TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1987 (11) TMI 229
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the petition is rejected. G/Appeal No. 343/87. The appeal is directed against the order of the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals), Madras, dated 11-9-1987 confirming the order of the Deputy Collector of Central Excise, Bangalore, dated 18-6-1987 and rejecting the appellant's application for renewal of the Gold Dealers, Licence for the years 1986-1988. 2A. The appellant was a licensed gold dealer having a licence under the name and style of M/s. Sugan Jewellers at Robertsonpet, Kolar Gold Fields, and applied for renewal of his gold dealers licence on 3-12-1985 for three years ending 31-12-1988. The application was rejected by the original authority on the ground that the appellant was found to have contravened the provisions of the Go....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... will have to be viewed strictly and in terms of Rule 3 of the Gold Control (Licensing of Dealers) Rules, 1969 a dealer shall be qualified for the renewal of licence held by him only if he fulfilled the various conditions enumerated thereunder and under Clause (f) of Rule 3 the condition is that the applicant should not have contravened any provision of the Gold (Control) Act, 1968. The learned D.R. urged that there is no provision under law to relax the condition and further submitted that the ruling of the Tribunal was with reference to a case of lesser gravity in nature than the present one. 5. We have carefully considered the submissions made before us. The appellant's application for renewal of gold dealer licence for the three years ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tal we do not think that the same could be characterised as a very serious offence. We would like to take note of the fact that the Tribunal in the case of M. Sadananda Pai v. Collector of Central Excise, Cochin, reported in 1986 (26) E.L.T. 602, has had occasion to consider a case of non-renewal on grounds of contravention by the applicant and held that non-declaration by a dealer of certain ornaments found in his residential premises could not be viewed as a very serious offence so as to disentitle him from the grant of a renewal of the licence. In the decision of the Bench in the case of K.P. Raman cited before us by the learned counsel a reference has been made to the above ruling and also to a decision of the Collector of Central Excis....