1985 (2) TMI 274

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....) of the Gold (Control) Act, 1968. The confiscated goods had been allowed to be redeemed on payment of ₹ 31,000/-and subject to further conditions regarding conversion after redemption. A penalty of ₹ 5000/- had also been imposed on the Appellant under Section 74 of the Act. 2. The brief facts of the case are that Income-tax authorities searched the premises of the Appellant at Shahapur. Among other things, they found 6 gold chips and 96 gold coins referred to above. All the items except 6 gold coins were found concealed in a wall inside the Ganesh cupboard and 6 gold coins were found in the cupboard itself. The appellant denied knowledge of the existence of the 6 gold chips and 90 gold coins dug out of the wall and stated....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....siding in the premises from which the gold and gold ornaments were seized, the limit for non-declaration is 12,000 gms. (3x4000 gms.) He also referred to the following decisions of Courts in support of his stand regarding declaration : (i) the case of Asstt. Collector of Central Excise v. Rikabdas Tejumal Shah, page 427 Cencus Manual of Gold Control, 1982 edition ; (ii) J.A. Abdul Hamid v. Collector of Central Excise, Madras, page 343 ibid; (iii) Gem Palace v. Union of India, page 241 ibid ; (iv) Jayantilal Amritlal v. Union of India, page 230 ibid ; (In the last case it was held that a Kartha of a HUF had no liability under the Act for declaration). 5. The Senior Departmental Representative started by referri....