1981 (8) TMI 217 - HC - Central Excise

Summary

Issues Involved:
1. Clubbing of pledged and personal ornaments for declaration under Section 16 of the Gold (Control) Act, 1968.
2. Ownership and possession of gold ornaments exceeding the prescribed limit.
3. Validity of the orders passed by the Collector of Central Excise, the Gold Control Administrator, and the Central Government.

Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:

1. Clubbing of pledged and personal ornaments for declaration under Section 16 of the Gold (Control) Act, 1968:
The primary contention raised by the petitioner was that the quantities of both the pledged and personal ornaments could not be clubbed together for the purposes of making a declaration under section 16(1) or (3) of the Act. The court examined the relevant provisions of Section 16, particularly subsections (1), (2), (3), and (5). It was held that a person may own, possess, hold, or control ornaments in two different capacities within the prescribed quantity in each capacity without making a declaration. The court emphasized that the Act does not expressly or implicitly require the clubbing of holdings in different capacities for declaration purposes. Therefore, the household ornaments of Late Amolakchand as an individual could not be clubbed with the pawned ornaments for declaration purposes. Since both were within the prescribed limit in each capacity, no declaration was necessary.

2. Ownership and possession of gold ornaments exceeding the prescribed limit:
The petitioner argued that most of the gold ornaments seized from the Bank-locker weighing 1500.00 grammes belonged to his daughter, and thus, Late Amolakchand could not be said to be in possession of gold ornaments exceeding the prescribed limit. The court, however, did not delve into this issue in detail, as the petitioner was granted relief based on the first contention regarding the non-clubbing of pledged and personal ornaments.

3. Validity of the orders passed by the Collector of Central Excise, the Gold Control Administrator, and the Central Government:
The court reviewed the orders passed by the Collector of Central Excise, the Gold Control Administrator, and the Central Government, which had imposed fines and ordered the confiscation of the household ornaments. The court found that the impugned orders were based on an incorrect interpretation of the law, particularly concerning the clubbing of holdings for declaration purposes. Consequently, the court quashed the orders (Annexures VI, VIII, and XI) and directed the release and return of the confiscated ornaments weighing 1500.00 grammes to the petitioner.

Conclusion:
The petition was allowed, and the impugned orders were quashed. The court ordered the release and return of the confiscated ornaments to the petitioner, emphasizing that the holdings in different capacities should not be clubbed together for declaration purposes under the Gold (Control) Act, 1968.