https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=784825 Revenue's challenge to CENVAT credit was examined against the departmental stance when sanctioning refunds, with the tribunal finding that taking inconsistent positions is impermissible and that the appellants' entitlement to credit cannot be disallowed on that basis; consequence: the challenge to credit fails. The show cause invoking the extended period of limitation was held unjustified because Revenue knew the nature of services and credit availment and failed to establish suppression, misrepresentation or fraud with cogent evidence; consequence: extended limitation could not be invoked. The impugned orders were quashed and the appeal allowed. en-us Mon, 12 Jan 2026 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 13 Jan 2026 08:29:46 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=784825 Revenue's challenge to CENVAT credit was examined against the departmental stance when sanctioning refunds, with the tribunal finding that taking inconsistent positions is impermissible and that the appellants' entitlement to credit cannot be disallowed on that basis; consequence: the challenge to credit fails. The show cause invoking the extended period of limitation was held unjustified because Revenue knew the nature of services and credit availment and failed to establish suppression, misrepresentation or fraud with cogent evidence; consequence: extended limitation could not be invoked. The impugned orders were quashed and the appeal allowed. Case-Laws Service Tax Mon, 12 Jan 2026 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=784825