Extended limitation unavailable where captive ready mix concrete duty dispute turned on an interpretative exemption issue.

The article addresses whether the Revenue could invoke the extended period of limitation to demand duty on ready mix concrete manufactured at site and consumed captively, and whether the related penalty could stand. It notes that the dispute on merits was accepted against the assessee, but the exemption question involved a debatable issue of interpretation, with later Tribunal decisions supporting that view. On that basis, the extended limitation period was held unavailable to the Revenue. The demand raised beyond the normal period and the penalty were set aside, while only the demand within the normal limitation period was sustained.

---

---

Issues: Whether the extended period of limitation was available to the Revenue for demanding duty on ready mix concrete manufactured at site and consumed captively, and whether the demand beyond the normal period and the penalty could be sustained.

Analysis: The disputed liability on merits was accepted to be covered against the assessee, but the Court noted that the Supreme Court had itself acknowledged doubt in the field on the exemption issue. Following later Tribunal decisions, it held that the issue involved interpretation and that the Revenue could not invoke the extended period. As a result, only the demand within the normal limitation period could survive, while the time-barred demand and the penalty could not.

Conclusion: The extended period was held not available to the Revenue. The demand beyond the normal period and the penalty were set aside, while the demand within limitation was upheld.

---