Statutory limitation prevails over rebate notification conditions, so waiver cannot revive a time-barred rebate claim.

The limitation period for a rebate claim was governed by Section 11B of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944, not by the rebate notification issued under Rule 12 of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. Clause V of the notification only required the claim to be filed within the statutory period and did not create or extend limitation. The proviso permitting waiver of notification conditions could not override a limitation fixed by the parent statute, so the Collector had no power to waive delay. The rebate claim remained time-barred and rejection on limitation was sustained.

---

---

Issues: Whether the Collector could waive the condition in the rebate notification and grant rebate despite the claim being lodged beyond the period prescribed under Section 11B of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944.

Analysis: The period of limitation was held to arise from Section 11B of the Act and not from the notification issued under Rule 12 of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. Clause V of the notification merely required the claim to be lodged before expiry of the statutory period and did not itself create or extend the limitation period. The proviso enabling waiver of notification conditions could not be used to dispense with a limitation period fixed by the statute.

Conclusion: The Collector had no power to waive the statutory limitation under Section 11B, and the rejection of the rebate claim as time-barred was upheld.

Final Conclusion: The writ petition failed because the rebate claim remained barred by limitation and the impugned orders were sustained.

Ratio Decidendi: A power to waive conditions in a rebate notification does not authorise waiver of a limitation period prescribed by the parent statute.

---