2026-VIL-492-CESTAT-CHD-CE

CENTRAL EXCISE CESTAT Cases

Central Excise - Eligibility of CENVAT credit on capital goods such as towers, air conditioners, DG sets, battery sets, pre-fabricated structures, and input services used in construction/erection of transmission towers - The department denied CENVAT credit on the grounds that towers and its parts cannot be considered as parts & accessories of capital goods and would not fall under the definition of 'capital goods' as per Cenvat Credit Rules, and that towers and shelters are not covered as 'inputs' - Whether the Assessees are eligible for CENVAT credit on capital goods and input services used for towers and shelters - HELD - The Tribunal, following the judgments of the Supreme Court in Bharti Airtel Ltd. case and various High Courts and Tribunals, held that towers, pre-fabricated buildings, and input services used for their construction/erection are covered under the definition of 'capital goods' and 'inputs' under the Cenvat Credit Rules. These items are movable goods and not immovable property, and their use is essential for providing the output service of mobile telecommunications. Therefore, the Assessees are eligible for CENVAT credit on these items - The Tribunal allowed the Assessees' appeals and set aside the impugned orders denying the CENVAT credit - Transfer of CENVAT credit upon shifting of centralized registration from Jaipur to Gurgaon - The department denied transfer of CENVAT credit on the ground that the Assessees did not fulfill the conditions prescribed in Rule 10 of the Cenvat Credit Rules for transfer of CENVAT credit - Whether the Assessees are eligible to transfer the CENVAT credit upon shifting of centralized registration from Jaipur to Gurgaon - HELD – The Rule 10 does not bar the shifting of centralized accounting and billing function of a company. Shifting of centralized registration cannot be equated with the shifting or transfer of business, and there was no change in the Assessees' business or ownership status - Further, the mechanism of centralized registration was introduced for administrative and jurisdictional ease, and not to provide any tax advantage or credit benefits. The Tribunal also relied on the decisions in Central Bank of India and Mafatlal Industries Ltd. cases, which held that transfer of CENVAT credit cannot be denied merely on the ground of lack of proper documents - The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeal and upheld the impugned order allowing the transfer of CENVAT credit upon shifting of centralized registration.

Quick Search

/

Create Account



Log In



Forgot Password


Please Note: This facility is only for Subscribing Members.

Email this page



Feedback this page