Cenvat credit disclosure defeats extended limitation where full facts were already available to the department.

The extended period of limitation cannot be invoked to deny Cenvat credit where the assessee has disclosed the relevant facts in prescribed returns and statements. Disclosure of credit on capital goods spares in Form-1, together with capital goods credit register extracts and monthly returns, put the department on notice of the availment of credit. On those facts, suppression was not sustainable, so the longer limitation period was unavailable and the demand failed on limitation.

---

---

Issues: Whether the extended period of limitation could be invoked for denial of Cenvat credit when the relevant facts had been disclosed to the department in the prescribed returns and statements.

Analysis: The assessee had filed details of the credit taken on capital goods spares in Form-1, as required under Rule 7(5) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, together with the relevant capital goods credit register extracts, along with monthly returns. On these facts, the department was already aware of the availment of credit. Where the material facts are within the department's knowledge, a finding of suppression is not sustainable and the extended limitation period cannot be invoked.

Conclusion: The invocation of the extended period of limitation was invalid and the demand failed on limitation.

---