Export bond enforcement: demand upheld where proof of export was not produced within the prescribed period.

Goods cleared for export under bond were treated as assessed and secured through the running bond account at the time of clearance, with credit available only on later production of proof of export. Where export proof was not furnished within the prescribed period, the demand was characterised as enforcement of the bond condition under the Central Excise Rules, 1944 and Notification No. 197/62-CX, not as a case of duty not levied, not paid, or short-levied under Section 11A of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The limitation objection therefore failed, and recovery of the duty amount earlier secured by bond was upheld.

---

---

Issues: Whether the demand raised on non-production of proof of export for goods cleared under bond was barred by limitation under Section 11A of the Central Excise Act, 1944, or whether it was only enforcement of the bond obligation for export under the Central Excise Rules, 1944 and Notification No. 197/62-CX dated 17-1-1962.

Analysis: The order held that goods cleared for export under bond were assessed and charged to the bond at the time of clearance, with the running bond account being debited and later credited only on production of export proof. On failure to furnish proof of export within the prescribed period, the matter was treated as enforcement of the bond condition rather than a case of duty not levied, not paid, or short-levied within the meaning of Section 11A. The cited export provisions contemplated export within the prescribed period, and the demand merely sought recovery of the duty amount earlier secured under the bond mechanism. The relied-upon case law was distinguished on the ground that it did not address recovery through a running bond account.

Conclusion: The limitation plea failed, and the demand was upheld as valid enforcement of the bond obligation. The revision application was rejected.

---