Summary
The Supreme Court held that the pending 1971 gold-confiscation and penalty-enhancement notice did not survive repeal of the Gold Control Act. In this repeal, the legislative purpose disclosed a contrary intention to the usual General Clauses Act saving. The connected High Court judgments were set aside, with eight weeks for the parties to revise the Wealth Tax Reference questions in light of the vanished proceedings, followed by expeditious determination on merits.
Issues
- Whether the show-cause notice survived the 1990 repeal of the Gold Control Act.
- What consequence followed for the connected wealth-tax proceedings.
Provisions considered
- Section 2, Gold (Control) Repeal Act, 1990Read with the repeal’s stated purpose, the repeal manifested a contrary intention to preserving these proceedings through the usual general saving rule. The specified pending show-cause notice therefore no longer survived. (¶¶ 3, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10)
Held
- The repeal’s purpose expressly recognised the former law’s failure, regressive effect and hardship. On this particular legislative context, a contrary intention displaced the general saving rule; absence of an express saving was not treated as a universal rule for all repeals. (¶¶ 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9)
- The show-cause notice dated 1 June 1971 seeking confiscation and enhanced penalty no longer survived, and the appeal concerning it was disposed of on that basis. (¶ 10)
- In the connected matters, both parties were granted eight weeks to add, amend or delete Wealth Tax Reference questions to reflect the disappearance of the gold proceedings. The writ petitions were then to be decided on merits expeditiously. The common High Court judgment was set aside. (¶¶ 11, 12, 13)
Result
Appeal concerning the 1971 notice disposed of as the notice no longer survived repeal. Connected appeals allowed; common High Court judgment set aside, with eight weeks to revise reference questions and expeditious merits hearing thereafter.