https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=218417 Cenvat credit on input services cannot be denied merely because invoices are issued in the name of the head office or because the head office is not registered as an Input Service Distributor. The Tribunal applied Rule 9(2) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 and treated verifiable receipt of the services and proper accounting as the controlling test, rather than invoice form alone. It also rejected the Revenue's attempt to distinguish input services from goods on this point. Credit was therefore admissible and the departmental appeal failed, with the lower appellate relief to the assessee sustained. en-us Wed, 23 Nov 2011 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 15 Nov 2012 18:27:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=218417 Cenvat credit on input services cannot be denied merely because invoices are issued in the name of the head office or because the head office is not registered as an Input Service Distributor. The Tribunal applied Rule 9(2) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 and treated verifiable receipt of the services and proper accounting as the controlling test, rather than invoice form alone. It also rejected the Revenue's attempt to distinguish input services from goods on this point. Credit was therefore admissible and the departmental appeal failed, with the lower appellate relief to the assessee sustained. Case-Laws Service Tax Wed, 23 Nov 2011 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=218417