2015 (12) TMI 69 - AT - Central Excise

Denial of CENVAT Credit - invoices did not contain the registration number of the service provider which is a mandatory requirement - Held that - Even under Rule 9(2) of Cenvat Credit Rules, which empowers the proper officer to condone such omissions, non-mentioning of the registration number of the provider is not one of the omissions which can be condoned. Therefore, the demand Service Tax and interest has to be sustained as correctly made. Since the mistake is not on the part of the appellant and in fact if they were vigilant they could have got credit by insisting on a proper invoice. In such a situation for a mistake committed by the service provider, it may not be appropriate to impose penalty in addition to the reversal of credit with interest. Accordingly, the penalty imposed on the appellant is set aside - Decided partly in favour of assessee.

Summary

The CESTAT Bangalore upheld the denial of Cenvat credit due to missing service provider registration number on invoices. While the demand for Service Tax and interest was upheld, the penalty on the appellant was set aside as the mistake was on the service provider's part.