Cenvat credit cannot be denied for minor document defects when service tax was actually paid and substantive conditions were met.

Cenvat credit on service tax paid for renting of immovable property was treated as admissible where the recipient had actually borne and paid the tax, the payment was deposited in the Government account, and no other person had claimed the credit. A challan was accepted as a recognised document under the Cenvat scheme, and a mere mismatch in the name on the payment document was regarded as a technical defect that did not defeat substantive entitlement. The stated principle is that credit should not be denied on nomenclature or minor documentary irregularities when the core requirements of the scheme are satisfied.

---

---

Issues: Whether Cenvat credit of service tax paid on renting of immovable property could be denied merely because the payment document stood in the name of the original owner and not the service recipient, when the tax was actually paid by the appellant and no other person had taken credit.

Analysis: The appellant had paid the service tax out of the lease rent and the amount was deposited into the Government account. The record showed that the tax burden was borne by the appellant, was reflected in its books, and no other person claimed the credit. The challan was a recognised document under the Cenvat scheme, and any deficiency in particulars could have been considered by the competent authority. In these circumstances, denial of credit on a purely technical objection was not justified.

Conclusion: Cenvat credit was admissible to the appellant and the disallowance was unsustainable.

Final Conclusion: The credit demand, interest and penalty could not survive, and the appeal succeeded.

Ratio Decidendi: When the service tax has actually been paid by the recipient and the prescribed document evidences such payment, credit cannot be denied on a technical defect in nomenclature or particulars if the substantive requirements of the Cenvat scheme are met.

---