1988 (2) TMI 343

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ary gold valued at Rs. 29,000/-. In the search conducted at the premises of the appellants, 6.600 gms. of primary gold was recovered on the one hand and 170.000 gms. and 469.000 gms. were recovered from the partners of the firm. This primary gold was in the form of lagadi and rawa and was concealed on the person of the partners. In the case adjudicated by the department, the gold was confiscated although appellants were given option to redeem the same on payment of a fine of Rs.10,000/-. The firm and the partners were also penalised under Section 74 of the Gold (Control) Act, 1968 to the extent of Rs. 1000/-, Rs. 3000/-and Rs. 2000/-respectively. 2. In appeal, the order of confiscation and penalty imposed on the partners was confirmed. T....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ously in acceptance of the appellant's plea that the offence was a technical one and did not justify heavy impositions. (c) There were claimants in respect of the gold and there was no doubt about their identity. (d) It is true that the department had launched a prosecution against the firm and its two partners and that the Metropolitan Magistrate had imposed a fine of Rs. 350/- on each of them. At the same time, however, the Metropolitan Magistrate had expressed the view that the offence committed could not be viewed seriously in view of the fact that appellants had substantially accounted for the gold ornaments in their shop. (e) Above all, our attention is drawn to the fact that the conviction and sentence passed on the appellan....