https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=87923 Where the larger limitation period was not invoked, excise duty demand was confined to the normal statutory period: the notice entirely beyond six months was time-barred, and in the second notice only the invoices within six months survived. On valuation, erection, commissioning and testing charges were excluded from assessable value because the goods were manufactured in the factory, dismantled for transport, and re-erected at site. No substantive challenge was advanced on design and engineering charges. The demand was therefore sustainable only to the limited extent falling within limitation, with the remainder set aside. en-us Mon, 29 Dec 1997 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 13 Sep 2011 18:10:57 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=87923 Where the larger limitation period was not invoked, excise duty demand was confined to the normal statutory period: the notice entirely beyond six months was time-barred, and in the second notice only the invoices within six months survived. On valuation, erection, commissioning and testing charges were excluded from assessable value because the goods were manufactured in the factory, dismantled for transport, and re-erected at site. No substantive challenge was advanced on design and engineering charges. The demand was therefore sustainable only to the limited extent falling within limitation, with the remainder set aside. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 29 Dec 1997 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=87923