https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=759550 CESTAT Mumbai addressed disallowance of Cenvat Credit on input services for BTS towers/shelters. The case was referred to Larger Bench due to conflicting decisions between Bombay HC in Bharti Airtel case (denying credit) and various Tribunal benches (allowing credit). The referral bench questioned admissibility of Cenvat Credit for input services used in tower erection/commissioning, considering towers as immovable property. The Larger Bench distinguished Bharti Airtel decision as limited to inputs, not input services, ruling no break in Cenvat chain exists for input services. The impugned order was set aside and appeal allowed. en-us Mon, 30 Sep 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 03 Oct 2024 15:09:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=759550 CESTAT Mumbai addressed disallowance of Cenvat Credit on input services for BTS towers/shelters. The case was referred to Larger Bench due to conflicting decisions between Bombay HC in Bharti Airtel case (denying credit) and various Tribunal benches (allowing credit). The referral bench questioned admissibility of Cenvat Credit for input services used in tower erection/commissioning, considering towers as immovable property. The Larger Bench distinguished Bharti Airtel decision as limited to inputs, not input services, ruling no break in Cenvat chain exists for input services. The impugned order was set aside and appeal allowed. Case-Laws Service Tax Mon, 30 Sep 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=759550