Extended limitation for Cenvat credit recovery fails absent fraud or wilful suppression in recorded transactions.

Extended limitation could not be invoked for recovery of wrongly availed Cenvat credit on moulds and dies where the credit was taken on the basis of a then-operative CBEC circular, the transactions were duly recorded in the books, and the Revenue relied on those records. In the absence of fraud, wilful suppression, mala fide intent, or contumacious conduct, the ingredients for the extended period were not satisfied. The excess credit and interest had also been paid before the show cause notice. The show cause notice and the orders confirming demand and penalty were therefore unsustainable.

---

---

Issues: Whether the extended period of limitation could be invoked for recovery of wrongly availed Cenvat credit on moulds and dies.

Analysis: The appellant had availed credit on the basis of a CBEC circular then in force, the relevant transactions were recorded in the books of account in the ordinary course of business, and the Revenue had proceeded on the basis of those records. The excess credit and interest were paid before the show cause notice, and the record did not disclose fraud, wilful suppression, mala fide intent, or contumacious conduct necessary to sustain invocation of the extended period.

Conclusion: The extended period of limitation was not invokable, and the show cause notice and the orders confirming demand and penalty were unsustainable.

Ratio Decidendi: The extended period under the excise law cannot be invoked in the absence of fraud, wilful suppression, or similar culpable conduct, especially where the relevant facts were reflected in the assessee's records and the disputed amount was regularised before notice.

---