2017 (7) TMI 1470 - HC - Central Excise

Cenvat Credit - capital goods or not - being tower parts, green shelter, printers and office chairs - immovable property - tower would qualify as part or component or accessory of the capital goods i.e. antenna or not - HELD THAT - Reliance placed in the case of M/S. BHARTI AIRTEL LTD. (EARLIER KNOWN AS BHARTI TELE-VENTURES LTD.) VERSUS THE COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE 2014 (9) TMI 38 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT where it was held that ' The subject items are neither capital goods under Rule 2(a) nor inputs under Rule 2(k) of the Credit Rules and hence CENVAT credit of the duty paid thereon was not admissible to the appellants.' Appeal dismissed.

Summary

The Bombay High Court dismissed the appeal based on a previous judgment in a similar case involving Vodafone India Ltd. vs. Commissioner of Central Excise. The appeal was dismissed following the reasoning in the case of Bharti Airtel Ltd. vs. Commissioner of Central Excise.