Retrospective interest liability under excise law excluded where substituted provision shows no saving of earlier period

A substituted fiscal provision will not be read as preserving the earlier regime for prior periods where the text shows a different intention. Applying Section 6A of the General Clauses Act, the Tribunal held that the substituted Section 11AB of the Central Excise Act did not support recovery of interest for the period before 11-5-2001 because the proviso excluded duty that had become payable earlier. The same reasoning was applied to Rule 57-I(5) of the Central Excise Rules, and the Revenue's reliance on saving provisions was rejected. Interest for the pre-11-5-2001 period was therefore not recoverable.

---

---

Issues: Whether interest could be recovered for the period prior to 11-5-2001 under Section 11AB of the Central Excise Act, 1944 and Rule 57-I(5) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944, and whether the saving provisions relied upon by the Revenue preserved such liability.

Analysis: The earlier and substituted versions of Section 11AB were considered in the light of the proviso to the substituted provision, which indicated that sub-section (1) would not apply to duty that had become payable before the relevant date. Applying Section 6A of the General Clauses Act, 1897, the Tribunal held that the existence of a different intention in the substituted provision meant that the earlier provision was not saved for the pre-11-5-2001 period. The same reasoning was applied to Rule 57-I(5), and the cited Tribunal decisions were treated as settling the issue against the Revenue.

Conclusion: Recovery of interest for the pre-11-5-2001 period was not sustainable, and the Revenue's application was rejected.

Ratio Decidendi: Where a substituted fiscal provision expressly evinces a different intention excluding its operation for prior periods, the earlier provision is not preserved by the general saving clause and interest cannot be demanded for that prior period.

---