Order Date – 22 May 2023

Parties: M/s Reliance HR Services Private Limited Vs Assistant Commissioner of Service Tax, New Delhi

Facts –

• The Appellant, M/s Reliance HR Services Private Limited, are engaged in the provision of manpower recruitment agency and commercial training or coaching services.
• A show cause notice dated 28.04.2012 was issued to the appellants alleging that the appellants have wrongly availed Cenvat credit on input services and invoices issued in the name of locations which are not included in the Centralized registration and was confirmed by the Additional Commissioner.
• The appellant content that Cenvat credit was availed prior to registration at some locations with the service tax department; and non-registration of the branches is only a procedural lapse.

Issue – 

• Whether the appellants have wrongly availed Cenvat credit on input services?

Order –

• The Tribunal observed that in terms of Rule 4A(1) of Service Tax Rules, 1994 there is no requirement to indicate in the invoice, the registration number of the receiver, who avails Cenvat credit, i.e. in the instant case of the appellants.
• Further proviso to Rule 9(1) of Cenvat Credit Rules provides that even if the duty paying documents does not contain all particulars but contain the details of duty or service tax paid or payable, description of the goods or taxable service, assessable value name and address of the factory or warehouse or premises of first or second stage dealers or provider of output service, credit may be allowed.
• The Tribunal also relied on the decision of Rajender Kumar & Associates Vs. Commissioner of Service Tax, Delhi-II, wherein it is held that once the requirements of Rule 4A of the Service Tax Rules and Rule 9 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 are satisfied, the benefit of Cenvat credit on account of unregistered premises cannot be denied.
• Hence the appeal is allowed.