https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=240501 The appeals arising from a dispute over excise duty on aluminium door and window frames were disposed of with directions for re-quantification of the demand. The appellant's contention that the fabrication was outsourced to sub-contractors was rejected, but they were granted the benefit of installation cost as a non-excisable activity. The Tribunal found the demand beyond the limitation period unsustainable due to lack of prior demands for similar activities. The demand within the limitation period was to be re-quantified, excluding non-manufacturing activities like aluminium curtain walls, with consideration given to the small-scale exemption notification. en-us Wed, 17 Apr 2013 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 25 Oct 2013 18:38:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=240501 The appeals arising from a dispute over excise duty on aluminium door and window frames were disposed of with directions for re-quantification of the demand. The appellant's contention that the fabrication was outsourced to sub-contractors was rejected, but they were granted the benefit of installation cost as a non-excisable activity. The Tribunal found the demand beyond the limitation period unsustainable due to lack of prior demands for similar activities. The demand within the limitation period was to be re-quantified, excluding non-manufacturing activities like aluminium curtain walls, with consideration given to the small-scale exemption notification. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 17 Apr 2013 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=240501