https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=49826 The Tribunal ruled in favor of the Appellants, stating that they were only manufacturing signaling items of the fire/burglar alarm system, not the detecting parts. It was determined that the fire alarm system did not come into existence at the factory of the Appellants, and the installed system was not considered a marketable good. The Tribunal held that the value of bought-out items should not be included in the total value of clearance. Additionally, the Tribunal agreed that the demand for duty was time-barred as the Appellants had disclosed their activities and turnover details to the Department. The appeal was allowed on both merit and time-limit grounds. en-us Mon, 01 May 2000 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 17 Aug 2010 16:49:14 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=49826 The Tribunal ruled in favor of the Appellants, stating that they were only manufacturing signaling items of the fire/burglar alarm system, not the detecting parts. It was determined that the fire alarm system did not come into existence at the factory of the Appellants, and the installed system was not considered a marketable good. The Tribunal held that the value of bought-out items should not be included in the total value of clearance. Additionally, the Tribunal agreed that the demand for duty was time-barred as the Appellants had disclosed their activities and turnover details to the Department. The appeal was allowed on both merit and time-limit grounds. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 01 May 2000 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=49826