Retention during enquiry is distinct from seizure, so the six-month notice period ran only from formal seizure.

Retention of gold ornaments and documents during an enquiry is not the same as seizure under the statute. Articles taken into possession during checking could be retained pending enquiry, while seizure required a reason to believe that the Act had been contravened. On the facts, the initial taking was only for checking and retention, and formal seizure occurred only after the enquiry was completed. The six-month notice period therefore ran from the date of formal seizure, so the proviso requiring automatic return for want of timely notice was not attracted. The petitioners had no right to return of the articles on the basis that seizure had occurred on the earlier date.

---

---

Issues: Whether the gold ornaments and documents were seized on 24 February 1979 or only on 31 December 1980, and whether the petitioners were entitled to return of the articles for want of a notice within six months under the statute.

Analysis: The statutory scheme drew a distinction between retention of articles during an enquiry and seizure for contravention. Articles produced or taken into possession during checking could be retained under the provision governing enquiry and retention, while seizure under the seizure provision required a reason to believe that the Act had been contravened. On the facts, the initial taking into possession was in the course of checking and retention pending enquiry, and the formal seizure was made only when the enquiry was completed. The notice under the adjudication provision was issued within six months of that seizure, so the proviso requiring return for want of timely notice was not attracted.

Conclusion: The articles were not deemed seized on 24 February 1979, the notice was timely from the date of formal seizure, and the petitioners had no right to automatic return of the gold ornaments or documents.

Final Conclusion: The writ petition failed because the statutory condition for mandatory return of the seized articles was not established.

Ratio Decidendi: Retention of gold articles during an enquiry is not the same as seizure, and the six-month notice period runs from the date of formal seizure under the Act.

---