https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=243700 Cenvat credit could not be denied merely because the service invoices were issued in the name of the head office or registered office. Where receipt and utilisation of the services in the factory were undisputed, prior decisions and the Board's circular supported allowing credit on such invoices. The operative principle is that invoice nomenclature alone is not a valid ground to reject credit when the substantive entitlement and actual use of input services are established. en-us Tue, 10 Dec 2013 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 07 Feb 2014 20:25:17 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=243700 Cenvat credit could not be denied merely because the service invoices were issued in the name of the head office or registered office. Where receipt and utilisation of the services in the factory were undisputed, prior decisions and the Board's circular supported allowing credit on such invoices. The operative principle is that invoice nomenclature alone is not a valid ground to reject credit when the substantive entitlement and actual use of input services are established. Case-Laws Service Tax Tue, 10 Dec 2013 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=243700