Facts of the Case: The assessees, major telecom service infrastructure providers, availed Input Tax Credit (ITC) on goods and services used for the erection and installation of telecommunication towers. The Revenue denied ITC relying on Section 17(5)(d) of the CGST Act, 2017, contending that telecom towers constitute immovable property, and hence ITC on their construction/installation was blocked.
The assessees argued that telecom towers are movable in nature, as they can be dismantled, shifted, and reinstalled at different sites without losing their functional utility. They contended that such towers are essential plant and equipment used in providing output services, and therefore cannot be treated as “immovable property” under Section 17(5)(d).
Issue: Whether telecommunication towers qualify as immovable property falling within the bar under Section 17(5)(d) of the CGST Act, 2017, thereby disentitling the assessees from availing Input Tax Credit on goods and services used in their erection and installation.
Held that:
The Delhi High Court held that telecommunication towers, being capable of dismantling and relocation without loss of functionality, do not qualify as immovable property within the meaning of Section 17(5)(d) of the CGST Act.
Consequently, denial of ITC was unsustainable and the assessees were entitled to avail input tax credit on towers.
On Revenue’s challenge, the Supreme Court condoned the delay in filing the SLP but declined to interfere under Article 136 of the Constitution, holding that it was not a fit case for exercise of discretionary jurisdiction.
The SLP was accordingly dismissed, affirming the Delhi High Court’s ruling in favour of the assessees.
Case Name: COMMISSIONER, CGST APPEAL-1, DELHI ETC. vs. M/S BHARTI AIRTEL LIMITED ETC. dated 08.08.2025
To read the complete judgment 2025 Taxo.online 1794