Judgment :- R. JAYASIMHA BABU, J. Counsel contends that the Gold (Control) Act, as it's name indicates, deals with gold and, therefore anything other than gold should be excluded while considering the obligations of persons under that Act. 2.The petitioner was possessed of gold ornaments which exceeded in weight 4000 gms. A declaration in respect of such ornaments not having been made, and that fact having subsequently come to light, an order of confiscation had been made. By paying the redemption fine, the petitioner obtained the release of the ornaments, but questioned the confiscation and the levy of the redemption fine, as also the penalty, on the ground that the ornaments in question contained other stones and gems, and if the weight of those stones and gems were to be excluded, the weight of the ornaments would be less than 4000 gms., which would render Section 16 of the Gold (Control) Act inapplicable to the case of the petitioner. 3.The Gold (Control) Act, which has since been repealed, was enacted in the economic and financial interest of the communityinter aliafor controlling the production, manufacture, supply, distribution, use and possession of, and business in gold ornaments and articles of gold and matters connected therewith. "Gold " is defined in Section 2(j) of the Act as meaning gold including its alloy (whether virgin, melted or re-melted, wrought or unwrought) in any shape or form, of a purity of not less than nine carats and includes primary gold, article and ornament. 4."Ornament" is defined in Section 2(o) of the Act to mean a thing, in a finished form, meant for personal adornment or for the adornment of any idol deity or any other object of religious worship, made of, or manufactured from, gold, whether or not set with stones or gems (real or artificial), or with pearls (real, cultured or imitation) or with all or any of them and includes parts, pendants or broken pieces of ornament. 5.Section 16 of the Act imposed an obligation on every person who owns or is in possession, custody or control of, any article or ornament at the commencement of the Act, or acquired such possession, ownership, custody or control subsequently to make a declaration within thirty days from the date of the commencement of the Act, or from the date of acquisition, such declaration to be made in the prescribed from as to the quantity, description and other prescribed particulars of any article, or ornament, or both, owned, possessed, held or controlled by him. 6.Sub-section (5) of that Section exempted persons owning or ornaments of gold from making declarationinter aliain cases where as provided in sub-section 5(3)(b)(ii) of the Act. The articles and ornaments where both articles or ornaments are owned, possessed, held or controlled by a family does not exceed four thousand grammes. 7.Neither Section 16 of the Act, nor the definition clause provides for excluding the weight of the gem or pearl in the ornament while determining the quantity of four thousand grammes. An exemption clause is always required to be confined to the field for which it is specifically intended, as the exemption carves out a limited area from a larger area to which the provisions is applicable. The exemption provided in Section 16(5)(3)(b)(ii) of the Act does not provide for excluding the weight of gems or pearls while determining the weight of the articles and ornaments owned by the family. 8.The Gold (Control) Act has advisedly referred to ornaments, as gold is used by persons mainly in the form of ornaments of one kind or the other, and the ornaments are made sometimes out of gold alone and sometimes along with other articles such as gems and pearls or other articles. The Act was intended to be made applicable to gold in whatever form it was held, and the Act has dealt with ornaments made of gold, as also gold itself. The Act does not provide for excluding the weight of the gem or the pearl or other article used in association with gold for determining the obligation of a person owning such ornament to file a declaration. 9.The view taken by the Tribunal is the correct view. We may also notice here that the ornaments in question had not been disclosed in the normal course earlier. 9.The view taken by the Tribunal is the correct view. We may also notice here that the ornaments in question had not been disclosed in the normal course earlier. 10.Our answer to the question referred is that the definitions of "gold" and "ornaments" in the Gold (Control) Act, 1968 includes the weight of pearls and stones for the purpose of the penal provisions of the Act.