2017 (2) TMI 439

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ted by appellant are as follows: Sl. No. Appeal No. Appellants Vs. Respondent Period Notice Date Tax Amount Rs. 1. ST/429/2012 * M/s BSNL, Karimnagar Vs. Commissioner-Ill 2006-07 30.11.2010 2,82,455/- 2. ST/26070/2013 M/s BSNL, CellOne vs. Commissioner-Il April 2010 - March 20111 03.10.2011 2,53,91,431/-       April 2011 - March 2012 12.10.2012 2,32,97,186/- [Total=Rs. 4,86,88,617/-] 3. ST/25316/2013 M/s BSNL, CellOne Vs. Commissioner-Il March 2010 20.04.2011 85,92,330/- 4. ST/25945/2013 Commissioner-III Vs BSNL, Mehaboobnagar April 2008 - November 2011 27.02.2012 (by ADC) 25,58,873/- 5. ST/27250/2013 Commissioner-III Vs BSNL, Warangal 2008-09 & 2009-10 &nbs....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ound that the towers are immovable and hence not goods. Thus, credit is denied on the pre-fabricated buildings and towers on the premise that they are not capital goods within the meaning of Rule 2 (a) of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004. Ld. Advocate further points out that there was no intent to evade tax, no suppression of, any information, dispute arose only on differing interpretation which eventually had to be referred to a Larger Bench. Central Excise Audit teams had conducted regular audits. Periodical returns were also filed as prescribed. In the circumstances, there is no justification for penalty. So also, for the same reason, extended period of limitation cannot be invoked. 4. On behalf of the department, Ld. AR reiterated the cor....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....pretational in nature, the appellant cannot be saddled with penalty. In regard to issue concerning the eligibility of credit on the parts used in the towers, there has been sufficient confusion in the matter. It is also not disputed that there was more than one view in the matter and hence following the ratio laid down by Hon'ble Apex Courts in the judgment in Continental Foundation Jt. Venture case [2007 (216) ELT 177 (SC)] and also following the view taken by Coordinate Bench in M/s Tata Teleservices Ltd., and others Vs Commr of ST, Pune [2015-TlOL-628-CESTAT-MUM] and M/s Vodafone Essar Digilink India Ltd., Vs Commr of CE, Panchkula [2016-TIOL 873-CESTAT-CHD], we hold that the penalties imposed on the appellant on these cases will hav....