JANGALA HARANADH BABU Vs. ASSISTANT COLLECTOR OF CENTRAL EXCISE VIJAYWADA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The writ petition is filed against the order of the 3rd respondent bearing No. 270/1980 dated 29- 11-1980, seeking to quash the same.

(2.) The basic facts of the case are: The petitioner celebrated the birth anniversary of his only son, Chy. Ranjit Kumar, on 28-4-1974. On that occasion, in accordance with the family customs and traditions prevalent among the relations, six gold ornaments (i.e. gold tumbler, gold Kumkuma Bharina, gold plate, two gold Uggu Ginnelu, ad one gold coin totally weighing 174.900 grams) were presented as birth-day celebration gifts by some of the relatives. These articles were subsequently found in the cradle of the minor and it was not known who has mad the gift of these articles. There is no evidence to show whether all these articles were given by one person, or more than one person.

(3.) The income-tax authorities inspected the premises of the petitioner on 3/4-10-1974 and seized the side articles from his residence. The central Excise Department also moved into action and took an inventory of the said articles, weighing about 174,900 grams. The fact, came to light that all these articles were received by the petitioner on the occasion of the birth anniversary of his only son. A show-cause notice dated 23-2-1975 was issued by the 1st respondent alleging that the petitioner has contravened the provisions of section 8(3) and 16(3) of the Gol Control Act, 1968 by retaining the said articles, without making declaration. The petitioner submitted his written explanation, and also made a personal statement to the effect and he has not contravened any of the aforesaid provisions, and that ordering confiscation of the seized property is against law. The decision, however, was against the petitioner, who went up in appeal to the 2nd respondent. The 2nd respondent confirmed the order of the original authority and dismissed the appeal. Thereupon, the petitioner filed a revision before the 3rd respondent, but that too has been dismissed. It is against these orders that the present writ petition has been filed.