JUDGMENT

SABYASACHI MUKHARJI, J.:— This appeal is under section 35(L)(b) of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944, (hereinafter called the Act ) against the order dated 8th January, 1988 passed by the Customs, Excise & Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal. The issue involved in this appeal was whether in the facts and the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was legally justified in restricting the demand of duty to six months prior to the date of issue of show-cause notice, particularly in a case where longer period was invoked on the ground of suppression of information in the declaration furnished by the respondent.

2. The respondent manufactured patent and proprietary (P&P) medicines falling under T.I. 14E and also pharmacopoeic preparations falling under T.I. 68 of the Central Excise Tariff of an aggregate value of Rs. 20,59,338.60 and cleared during the period of 1-4-1979 to 31-9-1980, the same without payment of duty, availing the benefit of exemption notification No. 80/80.

3. Under the provisions of sub-clause (ii) of clause 2 of notification No. 80/80 dated 19th June, 1980 and sub-clause (iii) of clause (a) of notification No. 71/78 dated 1-3-1978 the manufacturer would not be eligible for exemption under the two notifications in respect of clearances of patent or proprietary medicines from 1st April, 1980 since the notification would not apply to a manufacturer who manufactures excisable goods falling under more than one item of the 1st Schedule of the Act, and the aggregate value of the clearances of all such excisable goods by the manufacturer or on his behalf are cleared for home consumption from one or more factories during the preceding. financial year had exceeded Rs. 20 lakhs.

4. The factory had cleared during the period from 1st April, 1980 to 29th October, 1980 (P&P) medicines failing under T.I. 14E valued at Rs. 1,32,050.09. The central excise duty payable on the goods removed was Rs. 55,802.01. The respondent filed a declaration for exemption under notification No. 71/78 dated 1-3-1978, and furnished particulars of only the value of P & P medicines manufactured and cleared by it during the preceding financial year i.e. 1979 80, and the respondent did not, furnish the particulars of the value of the goods cleared under Tariff Item 68 during the financial year 1979-80. It was noticed that the manufacturer did not file any declaration under Notification No. 111/78 dated 9-5-1978 claiming exemption from the licensing control.

However, on 30th July, 1980 the firm filed a classification list in respect of P & P medicines claiming exemption under notification No. 80/80. A show-cause notice was issued to the respondent who was asked to explain as to why excise-duty in respect of Patent & Proprietary medicines manufactured and cleared by it should not be demanded under proviso (a) to Rule 10(l) of the Central Excise Rules and why penalty should not be imposed on it under rule 173Q of the Central cleared the excise Rules, 1944 for having cleared goods without payment of duty in contravention of Rule 173Q (a) and (d) of the Central Excise Rules.

5. After submission of the reply by the respondents, the Collector of Central Excise held the respondents to be ineligible for the benefit of the two notifications and therefore duty was demanded from them in respect of the goods cleared by them for the period 1-4-1980 to 29-10-1980. The Collector was of the view that in view of the respondents failure to reveal the correct position, they were liable. The Collector was of the view that the time limit under rule 10 (Section 11A) would run for 5 years. The relevant portion of Section 11 A of the Act is as follows:-

"11-A. Recovery of duties not levied or not paid or short-levied or short-paid or erroneously refunded. - (1) When any duty of excise has not been levied or paid or has been short-levied or short-paid or erroneously refunded, a Central Excise Officer may, within six months from the relevant date, serve notice on the pers