Refund of accumulated Cenvat credit cannot be denied for a procedural registration defect where export services came from multiple units.

Refund of accumulated Cenvat credit under Notification No. 5/2006-C.E. (N.T.) read with Rule 5 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 was challenged on the ground that the centralised registration certificate mentioned only one unit, although export services were rendered from multiple STPI units and common registration had been sought. The omission of the other branch addresses in the certificate was treated as a procedural irregularity rather than a substantive defect. On a prima facie view, that irregularity was not sufficient to justify recovery of the refund already granted, and the pre-deposit requirement was waived with recovery stayed pending appeal.

---

---

Issues: Whether refund of accumulated credit under Notification No. 5/2006-C.E. (N.T.) read with Rule 5 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 could be disallowed merely because the centralized registration certificate mentioned only one unit, though the services were exported from multiple STPI units and common registration had been applied for.

Analysis: The units at different locations exported services, and common registration had been sought. The absence of the addresses of the other branches in the registration certificate was treated as, at most, a procedural irregularity. On a prima facie view, such irregularity was not considered sufficient to justify recovery of the refund already granted.

Outcome: Waiver of pre-deposit was granted and recovery under the impugned order was stayed till disposal of the appeal.

---