https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=263915 CENVAT credit on telecom towers, tower parts, shelters and prefabricated buildings was examined under Rule 2(a)(A), Rule 2(k) and Rule 3 of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004. Applying the binding interpretation in Bharti Airtel, the court treated towers and related structures, once erected, as immovable property and therefore outside the definitions of capital goods and inputs. A coordinate Bench was held bound by that interpretation and could not reopen the issue on the same provisions. Credit of duty paid on these items was therefore not admissible to the service provider, and the appeals failed. en-us Thu, 10 Sep 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 29 Mar 2017 14:12:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=263915 CENVAT credit on telecom towers, tower parts, shelters and prefabricated buildings was examined under Rule 2(a)(A), Rule 2(k) and Rule 3 of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004. Applying the binding interpretation in Bharti Airtel, the court treated towers and related structures, once erected, as immovable property and therefore outside the definitions of capital goods and inputs. A coordinate Bench was held bound by that interpretation and could not reopen the issue on the same provisions. Credit of duty paid on these items was therefore not admissible to the service provider, and the appeals failed. Case-Laws Service Tax Thu, 10 Sep 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=263915