BPL LTD. Vs. COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this appeal, appellant is contesting the includability of drawing and design charges in the assessable value of the PCB manufactured by the appellants. The appellants' contention is that the demands are barred by time as the details were found during the course of audit of books of accounts. They also contended they had filed the classification list, price list and periodically, the other details and Department was aware of the facts. There was no suppression of facts with an intent to evade duty. They stated that even if they were to include the same their Sister unit would have taken the modvat credit. They have relied on a large number of judgments to plead that the demand was barred by time in respect of Show Cause Notice Dated. 25.03.1999 which covered for the period 1.4.94 to 30.11.96 while 14 show cause notices are admitted within time.

(2.) We have heard Ld. Counsel Shri S. Raghu and Ld. DR Shri A. Jayachandran.

(3.) Ld. Counsel relied on the following judgments to plead that the larger period in respect of the show cause notice referred by him is barred by time.