CENVAT credit cannot be denied for invoice address mismatch alone when service receipt is otherwise supported.

CENVAT credit cannot be denied merely because invoices were addressed to a location different from the assessee's registered premises. CESTAT noted that the assessee had produced the registration certificate and supporting material showing services were received from hired premises, and no rule was shown to require the registered address to appear on the invoices as a precondition for credit. Relying on the cited precedent, the Tribunal held that an address mismatch by itself does not disentitle credit where the receipt and use of services are otherwise supported. Denial of CENVAT credit on this ground was therefore unsustainable.

---

---

Issues: Whether CENVAT credit can be denied merely because the invoices were not addressed to the registered premises of the assessee.

Analysis: The appeal concerned denial of CENVAT credit only on the ground that some invoices bore addresses different from the address shown in the service tax registration. The Tribunal held that the dispute was confined to whether such a mismatch by itself could disentitle credit. It noted that the assessee had produced the registration certificate and supporting material showing that services were provided from hired premises and that the precedent relied upon, including the principle stated in the cited authorities, rejected any requirement that the premises must be registered as a precondition for availing credit. The Tribunal further found that the absence of the registered address on the invoices did not, by itself, justify disallowance of credit when no rule was shown to impose such restriction.

Conclusion: Denial of CENVAT credit on this ground was unsustainable, and the issue was decided in favour of the assessee.

---