Limitation for confiscation notices under the Gold Control Act fails where no valid extension is proved, invalidating penalty proceedings.

A show cause notice under the Gold Control Act was required to be issued within six months of seizure unless a valid extension was proved under the governing proviso. The record showed the notice was served after expiry of that period, and although the notice referred to sanction for extension, no extension order or supporting material was produced despite repeated opportunities. In the absence of proof of valid extension, the notice was treated as time-barred. The resulting confiscation and penalty proceedings therefore lacked legal foundation, and the seized goods were ordered to be returned.

---

---

Issues: Whether the show cause notice initiating confiscation proceedings under the Gold Control Act, 1968 was issued within the prescribed limitation period and, if not, whether the confiscation and penalty orders could stand.

Analysis: The relevant rule under Section 79 required notice to be issued within six months from seizure, unless a valid extension had been granted under the second proviso. The record showed the last seizure date as 3-4-1969 and the notice was served after expiry of six months. Although the notice recited that sanction for extension had been obtained, no order granting extension or material supporting such sanction was produced despite repeated opportunities. In the absence of proof of a valid extension, the notice was held to be beyond limitation. Once the notice was time-barred, the subsequent confiscation and penalty proceedings were without legal foundation.

Conclusion: The show cause notice was time-barred and invalid, and the confiscation and penalty orders were bad in law; the seized goods were directed to be returned to the petitioner.

---