9911796707
TMI Blog1978 (9) TMI 73X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ected of carrying primary gold. The appellant was carrying a quantity of 3491.900 grams of gold rods and semi-finished articles. He was taken to the police station. The Sub-Inspector of Police informed the Deputy Superintendent of Central Excise, Chittor about this and the latter proceeded to Renigunta on 26-5-1964 and took possession of the gold from the room in the police station in which it was placed by the Sub-Inspector of Police. A statement was taken from the Appellant in which he said that the gold constituted 'ornaments' and was not primary gold. The Collector of Central Excise subsequently enquired into the matter. A trade panel opined that they were gold ornaments and not primary gold. The Collector of Central Excise did not agre ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... been in possession of the appellant and as they were subsequently seized by the Deputy Superintendent of Central Excise who was an authorised officer, the seizure was legal. 3. It is next contended by Shri Dhanurbhanudu, the learned Counsel for the appellant, that even the Deputy Superintendent of Central Excise could not seize the gold as he was not an officer authorised by the Administrator by writing as required by Rule 126(L) of the Defence of India Rules. It is, however, admitted that there was a notification of the Government of India authorising the Deputy Superintendent of Central Excise to exercise the powers to seize gold under Rule 126(L)(2) of Defence of India Rules. We are unable to accept the argument advanced that such a n ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... stly, the learned Counsels sought to contend that the Collector, who was himself the judge, ought not to have proceeded merely upon his own opinion about the nature of the articles, thereby constituting himself both a judge and a prosecutor. We do not see any force in this submission. The Collector had jurisdiction to decide whether the articles seized was primary gold or ornaments and it was open to him to rely upon his own observation of the actual articles seized. In doing so it cannot be said that he was acting both as a judge and as a prosecutor. For instance it is well known that a judge is asked to make a local inspection of any land or building which is the subject matter of a suit and acts upon the impression formed by him on such ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
