https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=340000 The Tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside the order that denied the appellant the CENVAT credit for services utilized at the head office not registered as an Input Service Distributor. The Tribunal held that non-registration of the head office as an ISD does not automatically disentitle the appellant from availing the credit at the factory, especially when proper records were maintained. The decision was based on a precedent from the High Court of Gujarat, emphasizing that procedural irregularities should not bar the availment of CENVAT credit. en-us Mon, 13 Feb 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 11 Mar 2017 10:06:49 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=340000 The Tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside the order that denied the appellant the CENVAT credit for services utilized at the head office not registered as an Input Service Distributor. The Tribunal held that non-registration of the head office as an ISD does not automatically disentitle the appellant from availing the credit at the factory, especially when proper records were maintained. The decision was based on a precedent from the High Court of Gujarat, emphasizing that procedural irregularities should not bar the availment of CENVAT credit. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 13 Feb 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=340000