2009 (4) TMI 777 - AT - Service Tax

MODVAT credit - Manufacture - towers - excisability/movability - Held that - once the manufacturer pays the duty, the recipient of the input is entitled to avail credit of the same irrespective of the fact whether duty was required to be paid or not.

Summary

Ideally, the summary should be a brief and concise representation of the key points of the judgment. Here is a condensed version of the judgment you provided:

Title: Appellate Tribunal CESTAT AHMEDABAD
Citation: 2009 (4) TMI 777 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD
Judges: Ms. Archana Wadhwa and Shri B.S.V. Murthy
Advocates: Shri Sandeep Sachdeva, C.A. for the Appellant; Dr. Manoj Kumar Rajak, SDR for the Respondent

Summary:
The appellant requested to dispense with the pre-deposit of duty and penalty amounting to Rs. 1,05,32,336, which was confirmed against them by denying Modvat credit on towers used for telephone/mobile services. The advocate cited previous Tribunal decisions in favor of the appellant, while the respondent referred to judgments stating that towers do not amount to manufacture. The advocate argued that since the tower manufacturer paid duty, the appellant was entitled to credit. The Tribunal granted an unconditional stay, noting that other similarly situated appellants had received the same benefit. The judgment was pronounced in favor of the appellant.

This summary captures the main points of the judgment without going into excessive detail. If you require a more in-depth analysis, feel free to ask!