Retrospective excise levy remains subject to limitation; differential duty demand was held time-barred under the statutory notice period.

Differential excise duty arising from the retrospective operation of Notification No. 22/82 and Section 52 of the Finance Act, 1982 remained subject to the limitation period under Section 11A of the Central Excises and Salt Act. The Tribunal found no express provision in either the Finance Act amendment or the notification authorising recovery beyond the statutory time limit, and applied harmonious construction to read the retrospective levy consistently with Section 11A. The demand was therefore barred by limitation and could not survive merely because the levy operated retrospectively; consequential relief followed for the assessee.

---

---

Issues: Whether the demand for differential excise duty, arising from the retrospective operation of Notification No. 22/82 and Section 52 of the Finance Act, 1982, was barred by limitation under Section 11A of the Central Excises and Salt Act.

Analysis: The demand related to clearances made during the period covered by the retrospective notification. The Tribunal held that there was no specific provision in Section 52 of the Finance Act, 1982 or in Notification No. 22/82 authorising the Excise authorities to raise demands beyond the period prescribed by Section 11A. Applying the principle of harmonious construction, the retrospective amendment was treated as subject to the limitation provision, and the demand could not survive merely because of the retrospective levy.

Conclusion: The demand was time-barred under Section 11A and the appeal was allowed with consequential relief to the assessee.

---