TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2013 (8) TMI 228
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed, I find that that the issue involved in this case is regarding denial of CENVAT Credit to the appellant as the Service Tax which has been paid by them on the services received in the corporate office as well as in the factory only on the ground that the invoices of service provider has address of the corporate office and corporate office did not have input service distribution registration. 2.....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... office and in the absence of any registration under ISD, the CENVAT Credit was correctly denied. 5. On careful consideration, I find that the facts are not disputed by both sides in as much as the credit was availed on the invoices which were addressed in the name of their corporate office. It is also undisputed that the appellant has got only one factory situated at Vadodara. I find that there ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....striction for utilisation of such credit without allocating proportionately to various units. The omission to take registration as an Input Service Distributor can at best be considered as procedural irregularity and in view of the decisions cited, has to be considered sympathetically. Further, it is also noticed that appellant has not got any extra benefit by doing this. In fact from the statemen....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
...., 1944 are set-aside. 6. Proceedings also include proposal of recovery of service tax credit amounting to Rs. 43,159/- paid before 10-9-2004, which has been taken by the appellant and utilised for payment of service tax. Learned counsel admitted that prior to 10-9-2004, credit of service tax paid was not available to the manufacturing unit and therefore, this has been correctly disallowed. Since ....