https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=375248 The Tribunal allowed the appellant, engaged in information technology services, to claim input credit on invoices issued for premises other than the registered one, despite the procedural lapse of not registering those premises. The Tribunal emphasized that registration is not a prerequisite for claiming Cenvat credit and differentiated between substantive and procedural lapses. The High Court affirmed the Tribunal's decision, reinforcing that registration is not mandatory for claiming input credit and that substantive benefits should not be denied due to procedural lapses. The appellant was entitled to input credit despite the non-registration of certain premises. en-us Tue, 12 Feb 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 25 Nov 2019 15:05:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=375248 The Tribunal allowed the appellant, engaged in information technology services, to claim input credit on invoices issued for premises other than the registered one, despite the procedural lapse of not registering those premises. The Tribunal emphasized that registration is not a prerequisite for claiming Cenvat credit and differentiated between substantive and procedural lapses. The High Court affirmed the Tribunal's decision, reinforcing that registration is not mandatory for claiming input credit and that substantive benefits should not be denied due to procedural lapses. The appellant was entitled to input credit despite the non-registration of certain premises. Case-Laws Service Tax Tue, 12 Feb 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=375248