Bona fide CENVAT credit claim amid conflicting views bars extended limitation and penalty for outward GTA services.

Conflicting Tribunal views on CENVAT credit for service tax paid on outward GTA services defeated invocation of the extended period of limitation. In light of the interpretational uncertainty, the assessee's availment of credit under a bona fide understanding could not be treated as suppression or misstatement of facts, so penalty was also unwarranted. The remand on the substantive eligibility of credit was not in issue and required no further finding.

---

---

Issues: Whether the extended period of limitation could be invoked and penalty imposed where CENVAT credit was taken on outward GTA services amid conflicting interpretations on eligibility.

Analysis: The dispute turned on the effect of divergent Tribunal views regarding eligibility of CENVAT credit on service tax paid on outward transportation of finished goods. In the presence of such interpretational uncertainty, the assessee's claim that the credit was taken under a bona fide understanding could not be treated as suppression or misstatement of facts. The remand on the merits of credit eligibility was not under challenge and, therefore, no finding was required on that aspect.

Conclusion: The extended period of limitation was not invocable and penalty was not warranted.

---