https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=765668 The Tribunal allowed the appellant's claim for cenvat credit on inputs used in erecting transmission towers, reversing the lower authority's disallowance. It applied the Supreme Court's interpretation from Bharti Airtel Ltd. vs. CCE, Pune, which emphasized a non-restrictive understanding of "input" under Rule 2(k) of the CENVAT Credit Rules. The Tribunal concluded that transmission towers, essential for mobile telecommunication services, qualify as inputs, thereby entitling the appellant to avail cenvat credit. The decision underscored the principle that structures crucial for service provision, even if not directly involved, qualify as inputs. en-us Wed, 05 Feb 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 07 Feb 2025 08:38:44 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=765668 The Tribunal allowed the appellant's claim for cenvat credit on inputs used in erecting transmission towers, reversing the lower authority's disallowance. It applied the Supreme Court's interpretation from Bharti Airtel Ltd. vs. CCE, Pune, which emphasized a non-restrictive understanding of "input" under Rule 2(k) of the CENVAT Credit Rules. The Tribunal concluded that transmission towers, essential for mobile telecommunication services, qualify as inputs, thereby entitling the appellant to avail cenvat credit. The decision underscored the principle that structures crucial for service provision, even if not directly involved, qualify as inputs. Case-Laws Service Tax Wed, 05 Feb 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=765668