Assessable value and extended limitation fail where site-assembled bought out goods become part of immovable property.

Bought out item 'Alcopanel' assembled at site and treated as part of immovable property was held not includible in assessable value, following the principle that such site-integrated goods are excluded from excise valuation. The Tribunal also held that the extended limitation period for duty demand could not be invoked because the show cause notice did not allege wilful suppression or intent to evade duty. Revenue's reliance on the self-assessment scheme did not cure the absence of the statutory ingredients for invoking the longer period, so the Commissioner (Appeals)' limitation-based relief was upheld and the Revenue appeal was rejected.

---

---

Issues: (i) whether the longer period of limitation under the proviso to Section 11A of the Central Excise Act, 1944 could be invoked for the demand; (ii) whether the value of the bought-out item used at site was includible in the assessable value.

Issue (i): whether the longer period of limitation under the proviso to Section 11A of the Central Excise Act, 1944 could be invoked for the demand.

Analysis: The demand related to a past period and the show cause notice did not contain a specific allegation of wilful suppression of facts or contravention of the Act or Rules with intent to evade duty. The material relied on by the Department did not establish the ingredients necessary to sustain invocation of the extended limitation period.

Conclusion: The extended period was not available and the demand was time-barred.

Issue (ii): whether the value of the bought-out item used at site was includible in the assessable value.

Analysis: The bought-out item was assembled at site along with the aluminium structures and became part of the immovable property. On that footing, the value of such bought-out item was not required to be added to the assessable value.

Conclusion: The value of the bought-out item was not includible in the assessable value.

Final Conclusion: The Revenue's appeal failed on both limitation and merits, and the order setting aside the duty demand and penalties was upheld.

Ratio Decidendi: Extended limitation under the central excise law can be invoked only where the show cause notice and material on record establish wilful suppression or similar culpable conduct with intent to evade duty, and items assembled into immovable property at site are not includible in the assessable value as such.

---