Cenvat credit on residential telephone services and limitation for extended demand turn on business use and absence of intent to evade.

Telephone and landline services installed at the residences of senior officers were treated as input services for Cenvat credit where the assessee paid the bills and the services were used for business purposes; the contrary Revenue objection was not accepted, so credit was admissible. The extended period of limitation was also unavailable because favourable legal authority on such credit already existed during the relevant period, and the record did not show suppression or intent to evade duty. The adverse order was therefore set aside and consequential relief followed.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether Cenvat credit was admissible on telephone services installed at the residences of senior officers when the bills were paid by the assessee. (ii) Whether the demand could be sustained by invoking the extended period of limitation.

Issue (i): Whether Cenvat credit was admissible on telephone services installed at the residences of senior officers when the bills were paid by the assessee.

Analysis: The appeal concerned telephone and landline services used at the residences of senior officers, with the bills paid by the assessee. The settled view relied upon showed that mobile and residential landline services used for business purposes qualify as input services, and the departmental circular also supported admissibility in similar circumstances. The contrary reliance placed by the Revenue was not found sufficient to displace the line of authorities supporting credit.

Conclusion: Cenvat credit on the residential telephone services was held to be admissible, in favour of the assessee.

Issue (ii): Whether the demand could be sustained by invoking the extended period of limitation.

Analysis: Since favourable decisions on the admissibility of such credit were already available during the relevant period, the assessee's availment of credit could not be treated as having been made with intent to evade duty. On that basis, the ingredients necessary for invoking the extended period were absent.

Conclusion: The demand was held to be time-barred, in favour of the assessee.

Final Conclusion: The assessee succeeded on both merits and limitation, and the adverse order was set aside with consequential relief.

Ratio Decidendi: Telephone services at employees' or officers' residences can qualify as input services for Cenvat credit where they are used for business purposes and the bills are paid by the assessee, and an extended limitation period cannot be invoked in the absence of suppression or intent to evade duty when the legal position was already settled.

---