Extended limitation under central excise law required issuance by the Collector, not a Deputy Collector.

After the December 1985 amendment to Section 11A of the Central Excises & Salt Act, a show cause notice for recovery beyond the normal limitation period on grounds such as suppression or contravention had to be issued by the Collector of Central Excise. A notice signed and issued by the Deputy Collector in place of the Collector was held not to satisfy that requirement, even though it formed part of the Collector's office. The notice seeking to invoke the extended period of limitation was therefore invalid and could not validly support the demand.

---

---

Issues: Whether a show cause notice invoking the extended period of limitation under Section 11A of the Central Excises & Salt Act, 1944, was valid when it was signed and issued by the Deputy Collector of Central Excise instead of the Collector of Central Excise.

Analysis: After the amendment to Section 11A from December 1985, a notice proposing recovery beyond the normal period on grounds such as suppression or contravention was required to be issued by the Collector of Central Excise. The notice in question, issued on 15-7-1986 and signed by the Deputy Collector, was used to raise a demand for the period 1980-81 to 24-1-1986 under the extended limitation period. The contention that a notice signed by the Deputy Collector, being part of the Collector's office, could be treated as a notice by the Collector was rejected.

Conclusion: The show cause notice was not proper and was invalid for invoking the extended period of limitation.

---