Limitation on excise interest recovery: delayed duty interest is a separate civil liability and was held recoverable.

Interest for delayed payment of central excise duty was treated as a distinct civil liability, separate from penalty, under the statutory scheme of Section 11A and Section 11AB. The absence of an express limitation period for recovery of interest did not justify importing the limitation applicable to duty demands, and the customs decision cited was read only as stating a general principle, not as authority for applying Section 11A limitation to interest recovery. As the recovery action was initiated within five years, it was not held to be beyond a reasonable period, and the demand of interest was recoverable.

---

---

Issues: Whether the demand of interest for delayed payment of central excise duty was barred by limitation and whether recovery of such interest could be sustained on the facts of the case.

Analysis: The liability to pay interest under the central excise scheme was treated as distinct from penalty and as a civil liability attaching to delayed payment of duty. The Court read the statutory scheme of Section 11A and Section 11AB and held that the absence of an express limitation period for recovery of interest did not justify importing the limitation applicable to duty demands. The decision in the customs context was treated as laying down only a general principle that the period for the principal claim may apply to interest, not as authority for importing Section 11A limitation into interest recovery. Since the action for recovery was taken within five years, it was not beyond a reasonable period.

Conclusion: The demand of interest was not barred by limitation and was legally recoverable; the objection of the assessee failed.

---