Refund of CENVAT credit upheld despite unregistered premises; Court rules in favor of assessee

The Court dismissed the Central Excise Appeal under Section 35-G of the Central Excise Act, 1944, holding that the refund of CENVAT credit for services used at unregistered premises was correctly allowed by the Tribunal. The Court ruled in favor of the assessee, emphasizing that the refund cannot be denied solely based on non-registration of premises, as per legal provisions and precedents. The appeal was therefore dismissed in favor of the assessee.

---

---

Issues:
Central Excise Appeal under Section 35-G of the Central Excise Act, 1944; Refund of CENVAT credit for services used at unregistered premises.

Analysis:
The judgment pertains to a Central Excise Appeal under Section 35-G of the Central Excise Act, 1944, arising from Appeal No. ST/51147/2015 against an order dated 09.06.2016. The Tribunal had allowed the claim of the assessee for a refund, leading to the department raising the question of whether the CENVAT credit of services used at unregistered premises and the refund thereof were correctly allowed by the Hon'ble CESTAT. This issue had been previously considered by the High Court in the case of Commissioner, Service Tax Commissionerate Vs. M/s Atrenta India Pvt. Noida, where it was held that the refund cannot be denied solely based on non-registration of premises. The Tribunal in the present matter noted that the premises in question were rented in April 2012, and the application for inclusion of the address in the centralized R.C. was approved in July 2013. Additionally, it was highlighted that as per Rule 3 of CCE 2004, it was not mandatory for input services to be received at registered premises of the output service provider.

The Court, considering the above facts and legal provisions, answered the question in favor of the assessee and against the department. It was concluded that the refund could not be denied based on the non-registration of premises, and therefore, the appeal was dismissed.

---