Limitation for excise notice under Section 36(2) can be computed by reference to Section 11A despite later commencement.

The third proviso to Section 36(2) of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 fixes limitation for a proposed levy or enhancement by reference to the time limit in Section 11A, even if Section 11A had not yet been brought into force when the notice was issued. The notice under Section 36(2) is not issued under Section 11A itself; the proviso merely uses Section 11A as the measure for computing limitation. On that basis, the six-month period applicable to a short-levy case governed the notice, and the later commencement of Section 11A did not defeat the notice.

---

---

Issues: Whether the time limit for issuing a show cause notice under the third proviso to Section 36(2) of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944, had to be reckoned by reference to Section 11A even though Section 11A had not been brought into force when the notice was issued.

Analysis: The third proviso to Section 36(2) only prescribes the manner in which the limitation for a proposed order of levy or enhancement is to be determined, by referring to the time limit specified in Section 11A. The notice under Section 36(2) is not issued under Section 11A itself. Since both the third proviso and Section 11A were enacted in 1978, the later commencement of Section 11A did not affect the operation of the proviso for computing the time limit. The six-month period applicable to a short levy case therefore governed the notice.

Conclusion: The notice was governed by the time limit in Section 11A and was not saved by the fact that Section 11A was brought into force later; the contention of the appellant failed.

---