Extended limitation cannot apply where valuation is debatable and disclosed facts show no suppression of material facts.

The extended period of limitation could not be invoked for a show cause notice on inclusion of mould and die costs in assessable value because the assessee had disclosed the relevant facts through price lists and declarations. The issue was already the subject of conflicting Tribunal views and a Larger Bench reference, showing a bona fide interpretative dispute rather than suppression or concealment of material facts. On that basis, the notice was held time-barred and the extended limitation invalid.

---

---

Issues: Whether the show cause notice was bad for invocation of the extended period of limitation.

Analysis: The dispute related to inclusion of the cost of moulds/dies in the assessable value. The issue was the subject of conflicting Tribunal views and had been referred to a Larger Bench, which indicates that the controversy was debatable and involved interpretation. The assessee had filed price lists and other declarations, and the record did not justify an inference of suppression or concealment for evasion of duty. In these circumstances, invocation of the extended period was not sustainable.

Conclusion: The show cause notice was barred by limitation and the invocation of the extended period of limitation was invalid.

Ratio Decidendi: Where the relevant facts were disclosed and the issue was under bona fide interpretative dispute with conflicting views, extended limitation cannot be invoked in the absence of suppression or concealment of material facts.

---