Extended limitation barred where prior favourable rulings supported bona fide conduct and no suppression or wilful misdeclaration existed.

Extended limitation could not be invoked where the assessee acted under a bona fide view supported by earlier Tribunal decisions in its favour, and there was no suppression or wilful misdeclaration. The demand related to an earlier period, but the later show-cause notice could not convert that conduct into deliberate concealment merely because a contrary view emerged later. The Tribunal therefore treated the demand as time-barred and found it unnecessary to examine the merits.

---

---

Issues: Whether the Revenue could invoke limitation and allegations of suppression or misdeclaration to sustain the demand, when the issue had been consistently decided in favour of the assessee until a later contrary view.

Analysis: The demand related to a past period and the show-cause notice was issued later. The Tribunal noted that, until the later decision in ITC Ltd., the earlier Tribunal decisions on the same subject had been in favour of the assessee. In that situation, the assessee's conduct could not be treated as suppression or misdeclaration so as to justify confirmation of demand by invoking the extended period. The Tribunal therefore found it unnecessary to examine the merits.

Conclusion: The demand was hit by limitation and the Revenue's appeal failed on that ground.

Ratio Decidendi: Where the issue was supported by earlier favourable decisions and the assessee acted under a bona fide view, the extended period cannot be invoked in the absence of suppression or wilful misdeclaration.

---