9911796707
|
Home
Issues: Seizure and confiscation of gold and gold ornaments, failure to investigate names on tags, applicability of Gold Control Act 1968, continuation of proceedings under old Act.
In this case, the Appellate Tribunal at Calcutta dealt with a Reference Application stemming from the seizure and confiscation of gold and gold ornaments from a residence. The total weight of the seized items was 831.5 gms. The Gold Control Officers found private accounts suggesting illegal gold transactions dating back to 1966-67, while the seizure occurred in 1976. The appellant claimed the items were entrusted to him for safekeeping by individuals named on tags attached to the ornaments. The appellant argued that the Collector's failure to investigate the named individuals constituted a breach of law. Additionally, the appellant contended that the seizures predated the enactment of the Gold Control Act 1968, and thus, fresh proceedings under the new Act were not valid. The appellant's counsel argued that a reference under Sec. 82B of the Gold Control Act 1968 was necessary due to the alleged legal violations. On the other hand, the Department's counsel asserted that investigations were unnecessary as the named individuals lacked addresses, indicating fictitious identities. The Department contended that the offence under the old Act continued to be an offence under the new Act, citing legal precedents supporting the continuation of proceedings under the new law. After hearing both parties, the Tribunal found the Collector justified in not investigating the unnamed individuals due to the lack of addresses, rendering meaningful investigations impossible. The Tribunal rejected the appellant's claim of a legal point regarding the Collector's actions. The Tribunal also referenced a Supreme Court decision emphasizing the continuity of proceedings initiated under repealed laws unless a contrary intention is exhibited in the new enactment. The Tribunal analyzed the provisions of the Gold Control Act 1968 to ascertain the continuity of rights and liabilities under the repealed law. It concluded that the new Act preserved the rights and liabilities under the old law, thereby allowing proceedings for offences committed under the repealed law to continue under the new legislation. Consequently, the Tribunal dismissed the application, ruling that no reference was warranted in this case.
|
