https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=246715 The Tribunal held that the appellant company could avail credit for services received by its unit, even if the invoices were not in the unit's name. Rule 9(2) of the Cenvat Credit Rules was deemed applicable, requiring the receiver's address on the invoice. The absence of Input Service Distributor registration for the head office did not hinder credit availment. Precedent decisions supported the transfer of credit from the Head Office to the unit. The Tribunal rejected the Revenue's appeal, finding it lacked merit, and disposed of the cross objection as irrelevant. en-us Fri, 21 Dec 2012 00:00:00 +0530 Sun, 20 Apr 2014 16:44:14 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=246715 The Tribunal held that the appellant company could avail credit for services received by its unit, even if the invoices were not in the unit's name. Rule 9(2) of the Cenvat Credit Rules was deemed applicable, requiring the receiver's address on the invoice. The absence of Input Service Distributor registration for the head office did not hinder credit availment. Precedent decisions supported the transfer of credit from the Head Office to the unit. The Tribunal rejected the Revenue's appeal, finding it lacked merit, and disposed of the cross objection as irrelevant. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 21 Dec 2012 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=246715