https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=353023 Cenvat credit on input services was held not to be denied merely because the head office was not registered as an Input Service Distributor, where the credit was otherwise verifiable from records. The Tribunal treated the absence of such registration as a procedural defect, not a substantive bar, because the assessee had only one manufacturing unit and the head office acted only in support of that unit. On those facts, there was no inter-unit distribution issue, and the assessee remained entitled to the credit. en-us Wed, 14 Jun 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 12 Jan 2018 11:25:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=353023 Cenvat credit on input services was held not to be denied merely because the head office was not registered as an Input Service Distributor, where the credit was otherwise verifiable from records. The Tribunal treated the absence of such registration as a procedural defect, not a substantive bar, because the assessee had only one manufacturing unit and the head office acted only in support of that unit. On those facts, there was no inter-unit distribution issue, and the assessee remained entitled to the credit. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 14 Jun 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=353023