Goods Characterisation of telecom towers confirmed; Cenvat credit under Cenvat Credit Rules available for such inputs.

Whether telecom towers and prefabricated buildings constitute "goods" and thereby qualify as "inputs" under Rule 2(k) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 was the central question; the court applied the Supreme Court precedent finding such towers and prefabricated structures to be goods (not immovable property) and therefore eligible as inputs, the appellant conceded no distinguishing facts or law, and the appeal was dismissed with entitlement to Cenvat credit recognised for the assessee.

---

---

Issues: Whether towers and pre-fabricated buildings used for providing mobile telecommunication services are "goods" and consequently qualify as "inputs" under Rule 2(k) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004.

Analysis: The Court proceeded on the basis that the issue is squarely covered by the Supreme Court decision in Bharti Airtel Ltd. v. Commissioner of Central Excise, Pune (2024), which held that towers and prefabricated buildings used in provision of mobile telecommunication services are "goods" and not immovable property, and therefore qualify as "inputs" for claiming credit under the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. The non-applicant-appellant conceded that the present appeal falls within the scope of that Supreme Court ruling, and no contrary factual or legal distinction was pressed before this Court. In these circumstances the Court applied the binding precedent and accepted that the goods-characterisation and input-qualification under Rule 2(k) determine the entitlement to credit.

Conclusion: The appeal is dismissed and the issue is decided against the appellant and in favour of the assessee; towers and prefabricated buildings used for providing mobile telecommunication services are "goods" and qualify as "inputs" under Rule 2(k) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004.

---