https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=352960 Non-registration of the premises, by itself, was held not to justify denial of CENVAT credit or consequential refund where substantive entitlement under the rules was otherwise established. The Court followed its earlier Division Bench view that refund of service tax could not be refused merely because the assessee had no service tax registration during the relevant period, and that receipt of input service at a registered premises was not a condition precedent for availing the benefit. The issue was decided against the Revenue and in favour of the assessee. en-us Fri, 18 Aug 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 12 Feb 2018 17:28:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=352960 Non-registration of the premises, by itself, was held not to justify denial of CENVAT credit or consequential refund where substantive entitlement under the rules was otherwise established. The Court followed its earlier Division Bench view that refund of service tax could not be refused merely because the assessee had no service tax registration during the relevant period, and that receipt of input service at a registered premises was not a condition precedent for availing the benefit. The issue was decided against the Revenue and in favour of the assessee. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 18 Aug 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=352960