https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=291115 Cenvat credit on input services used across multiple centres could not be denied merely because invoices were addressed to one office and no Input Service Distributor registration was taken. The services were received, paid for, and used in the assessee's taxable radio operations, so the invoice format and ISD omission were treated as procedural lapses. As the credit could have been regularised through distribution to other registered locations and the arrangement was revenue neutral, the substantive entitlement to credit prevailed over the technical deficiency. The denial of Cenvat credit was therefore held unsustainable. en-us Wed, 15 May 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 28 Oct 2020 19:21:16 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=291115 Cenvat credit on input services used across multiple centres could not be denied merely because invoices were addressed to one office and no Input Service Distributor registration was taken. The services were received, paid for, and used in the assessee's taxable radio operations, so the invoice format and ISD omission were treated as procedural lapses. As the credit could have been regularised through distribution to other registered locations and the arrangement was revenue neutral, the substantive entitlement to credit prevailed over the technical deficiency. The denial of Cenvat credit was therefore held unsustainable. Case-Laws Service Tax Wed, 15 May 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=291115