Order Date – 26 May 2023

Parties: The Commissioner of Service Tax Vs M/s. Ad2Pro Global Creative Solutions Pvt. Ltd.

Facts – 

• The Respondent, M/s. Ad2Pro Global Creative Solutions Pvt. Ltd., are providing the taxable service of ‘Advertising’ to their clients abroad and have filed refund claims being the unutilized CENVAT Credit pertaining to the period October 2012 to June 2013.
• The refund sanctioning authority has disallowed credit of input tax credit on account of: (a) non-registration of premises, (b) Service Tax payment being made beyond the three-month period in terms of Rule 4(7) of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 and (c) CENVAT Credit taken before the date of payment of Service Tax.

Issue – 

• Whether Cenvat credit is allowed?

Order – 

• The Tribunal observed that the Hon'ble Madras High Court in the case of Commissioner of Service Tax-III, Chennai v. CESTAT, Chennai & Scionspire Consulting Services (India) Pvt. Ltd. [2017 (3) G.S.T.L. 45 (Mad.)] has held that in the absence of any statutory provision prescribing registration of premises as mandatory for availing input service tax credit, the assessee could not be denied refund of unutilized CENVAT Credit on input services.
• Hence it was held that t denial of CENVAT Credit for non-registration of premises is not justified in the facts of these appeals.
• Further in the case of India Cement Ltd. v. Commissioner of Central Excise, Customs and Service Tax, Tirupati [2018 (5) TMI 603 – CESTAT, Hyderabad] it was held that in the absence of any dispute that the appellant has discharged the tax liability as per the provisions of the Service Tax Rules and there being no dispute as to the eligibility to avail CENVAT Credit, availing CENVAT Credit before few days in advance is only a procedural lapse; credit cannot be denied on this basis.
• The appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed.