Cenvat credit cannot be denied for supplier misclassification or invoice address errors when service receipt and use are proved.

Cenvat credit could not be denied where labour service was actually received and used in manufacture, because the service provider's classification of the service under a different head did not affect the recipient's entitlement. The provider's registration or description of the service in another category was held immaterial to the credit claim. An incorrect address in the invoices also could not justify denial when receipt and use of service were undisputed, and that objection was outside the scope of the show cause notice. The assessee was therefore entitled to relief.

---

---

Issues: Whether Cenvat credit could be denied because the service provider classified the service under a different head and because of an incorrect address in the invoices.

Analysis: The credit was taken on labour service actually received and used in manufacture. The classification of the service was a matter for the service provider, and a recipient could not be denied credit merely because the provider had registered or described the service under another category. The address discrepancy in the invoices could not sustain denial where receipt and use of service were not disputed, and that ground was also beyond the scope of the show cause notice.

Conclusion: Cenvat credit could not be denied on either ground, and the assessee was entitled to relief.

---