Limitation barred demand on EOU clearances under CT-3 certificates, with prior precedent controlling the dispute.

Demand for AED (Surcharge) and Education Cess on clearances of tea wastes to a 100% EOU was treated as time-barred because the goods were cleared under CT-3 certificates and the dispute had already been covered by an earlier Tribunal ruling on identical facts. The Tribunal followed that prior view, together with the Supreme Court principle that such a demand cannot survive when raised beyond limitation. The merits of the levy were not examined, and the appeals were allowed on limitation alone.

---

---

Issues: Whether the demand of AED (Surcharge) and Education Cess on clearances of tea wastes to a 100% EOU was barred by limitation.

Analysis: The dispute had already been decided in an earlier Tribunal decision on identical facts. The clearance of goods to the EOU was made under CT-3 certificates, and the Tribunal followed the earlier view as well as the Supreme Court decision holding that, in such circumstances, the demand could not survive when raised beyond limitation. The merits of the levy were not examined.

Conclusion: The demand was held to be barred by limitation, and the appeals were allowed on that ground.

---