Judgement of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of M/s Bharti Airtel Ltd. vs The Commissioner of Central Excise, Pune III in Central Excise Appeal No. 73 of 2012 and 119 of 2012 (reported as 2014-TIOL-1452-HC-MUM-ST) – reg.
📋
Contents
Cases Cited
Referred In
Notifications
Circulars
Forms
Manuals
Acts
Rules & Regulations
Case Laws New
Ref Provisions New
Plus +
Source NTF
Summary
Similar
Note
Bookmark
Share
✓ Copied successfully !
Print
Print Options
For full text, please login
Login to TaxTMI
Verification Pending
The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on
CENVAT credit denial for tower components and prefabricated buildings upheld, restricting credit for service providers. The Bombay High Court held that towers and pre fabricated buildings are not inputs under Rule 2(k) nor capital goods under Rule 2(a) for a service provider; as immovable, non marketable and non excisable structures they cannot qualify for CENVAT credit and the Tribunal's denial of credit to the appellant was affirmed.
Cases where this provision is explicitly mentioned in the judgment/order text; may not be exhaustive. To view the complete list of cases mentioning this section, Click here.
Provisions expressly mentioned in the judgment/order text.
CENVAT credit denial for tower components and prefabricated buildings upheld, restricting credit for service providers.
The Bombay High Court held that towers and pre fabricated buildings are not inputs under Rule 2(k) nor capital goods under Rule 2(a) for a service provider; as immovable, non marketable and non excisable structures they cannot qualify for CENVAT credit and the Tribunal's denial of credit to the appellant was affirmed.
Full Summary is available for active users!
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.