Extended limitation for credit denial fails where Revenue took divergent stands and similarly placed assessees were already granted credit.

Extended limitation was found unsustainable where denial of credit arose on an issue on which similarly placed assessees had already been granted credit and the Revenue had taken divergent stands. The discussion treats the lack of uniformity in the Revenue's position, including its own appeals in comparable matters, as the decisive factor against invocation of the extended period. The denial of credit was therefore treated as barred by limitation, and the extended period of limitation as inapplicable.

---

---

Issues: Whether denial of credit was barred by limitation when the show cause notice was issued by invoking the extended period, in a situation where similarly placed assessees had been granted credit and the Revenue had taken divergent stands.

Analysis: The matter was not decided on the merits of entitlement to credit. The decisive consideration was that, on the same issue, similarly placed assessees had been allowed credit and the Revenue had itself pursued appeals in those matters, showing a lack of uniformity in its stand. In such circumstances, invocation of the extended period of limitation was held to be unsustainable.

Conclusion: The denial of credit was held to be barred by limitation and the extended period of limitation was held inapplicable.

---