https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=788936 Cenvat credit was held admissible where services were received on the basis of invoices from registered providers and payment was made through banking channels, because later non-availability of the providers at their registered addresses did not by itself disprove receipt of services or justify denial of credit. The recipient was not required to ensure that the service provider had deposited tax, and the related interest and penalty could not survive. A demand raised after a long lapse was also held time-barred where the relevant figures had been disclosed in returns and no suppression with intent to evade was shown, although the late fee for delayed filing remained payable. en-us Mon, 30 Mar 2026 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 01 Apr 2026 07:51:04 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=788936 Cenvat credit was held admissible where services were received on the basis of invoices from registered providers and payment was made through banking channels, because later non-availability of the providers at their registered addresses did not by itself disprove receipt of services or justify denial of credit. The recipient was not required to ensure that the service provider had deposited tax, and the related interest and penalty could not survive. A demand raised after a long lapse was also held time-barred where the relevant figures had been disclosed in returns and no suppression with intent to evade was shown, although the late fee for delayed filing remained payable. Case-Laws Service Tax Mon, 30 Mar 2026 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=788936