SIGN IN SUBSCRIBE

News Update

20 army men killed in blasts at army base in Cambodia3 Indian women from Gujarat died in mega SUV accident in USJNU switches to NET in place of entrance test for PhD admissionsGST - fake invoice - Patanjali served Rs 27 Cr demand noticeI-T - Bonafide claim of deduction by assessee which was accepted in first round of proceedings does not tantamount to furnishing of inaccurate particulars, simply because it was disallowed later: ITATIndia-bound oil tanker struck by Houthi’s missiles in Red SeaSCO Defence Ministers' Meeting endorses 'One Earth, One Family, One Future'RBI issues draft rules on digital lendingI-T - In order to invoke revisionary jurisdiction u/s 263, twin conditions of error in order and also prejudice to interest of Revenue must be established independently: ITATCRPF senior official served notice of dismissal on charges of sexual harassmentIndian Air Force ushers in Digital Transformation with DigiLocker IntegrationColumbia faculty blames leadership for police action against protestersCX - When process undertaken by assessee does not amount to manufacture, even then CENVAT credit is admissible if such inputs are cleared on payment of duty which would amount to reversal of credit availed: CESTATGoogle to inject USD 3 bn investment in data centre in IndianaCus - The equipments are teaching accessories which enable students in a class to respond to queries and these equipments are used along with ADP machine, same merits classification under CTH 8471 60 29: CESTATUN says clearing Gaza mounds of rubble to take 14 yrsST - When issue is of interpretation, appellant should not be fastened with demand for extended period, the demand confirmed for extended period is set aside: CESTATBlinken says China trying to interfere US Presidential pollsWorld Energy Congress 2024: IREDA CMD highlights need for Innovative Financing Solutions
 
Admissibility of CENVAT Credit on Telecom Towers - Matter referred to Larger Bench - Third Member reference in Idea Cellular case converted into reference to Larger Bench

By TIOL News Service

NEW DELHI, SEPT 09, 2015: THE dispute involved is whether the appellant is eligible for CENVAT Credit on Telecom Towers. During the course of extension of Stay already granted, the appellant stated that in another case (the case of Idea Mobile) involving the same issue viz. availability of CENVAT credit in respect of telecom towers, there has been a difference of opinion between the Members of the Division Bench and the matter is put up to the Hon'ble President, CESTAT for referring the matter to 3rd Member/Larger Bench. The appellant has pleaded that although vide the Misc. applications, it has only requested to adjourn the hearing and allow it to be an intervener in the case of Idea Mobile, as an intervener, it will not be able to argue the matter on facts and therefore instead of referring the difference of opinion to a 3rd Member, the President may constitute a Larger Bench of three Members which could consider the difference of opinion as well as these appeals. The appellant also pleaded that the President has full powers to constitute such a Bench and relied on some earlier decisions.

After considering the submissions on both sides, the Tribunal observed:

It is evident from the language of sub-section (5) of Section 129C that in case of difference of opinion, the President can refer the case for hearing on such point of difference by the one or more of the other Members of the Tribunal. It clearly means that the difference of opinion in a Division Bench need not necessarily and always be referred only to a single 3rd Member.

From the two judicial pronouncements in the cases of Dawoodi Bohra Community (2005) 2 Supreme Court Cases 673 and Paras Laminates Pvt Ltd. - 2002-TIOL-48-SC-CUS there remains no doubt that the President of CESTAT has full discretion/power regarding framing of roster, constitution of benches and directing any particular matter to be placed for hearing before any particular bench of any strength.

In the present appeals the issue involved is the same as that involved in the case of Idea Mobile which the Ld Member of Division Bench expressed a difference of opinion which is to be resolved. If that matter is referred to a 3rd Member, then these appeals will not be able to be tagged therewith and as an intervener, the appellants will not be able to argue the question of fact. In these circumstances, it will be more efficient if the difference of opinion is heard by a 3 Member Larger Bench in which case these appeals can also be heard by the same Bench. Accordingly, it is decided that these matters should be placed before the President with a request that the difference of opinion in the case of Idea Mobile may be referred to a Larger Bench of 3 Members and these appeals should be allowed to be tagged therewith to be heard by the same Larger Bench.

(See 2015-TIOL-1895-CESTAT-DEL)


 RECENT DISCUSSION(S) POST YOUR COMMENTS
   
 
Sub: Cenvat credit on Telecom Towers

In the case of Bharti Airtel Ltd. vs. CCE, Pune III [2014-TIOL-1452-HC-MUM-ST], Bombay High Court has already held that Cellular Mobile Service provider is not entitled to avail CENVAT credit on Tower Parts & Pre-fabricated buildings. On the basis of this judegment, CBEC has issued an Instruction F. No. 267/60/2014-CX.8 dated 11.11.2014, which is available on CBEC's website.

Posted by S B Parikh
 

TIOL Tube Latest

TIOL Tube
Shri N K Singh, recipient of TIOL FISCAL HERITAGE AWARD 2023, delivering his acceptance speech at Fiscal Awards event held on April 6, 2024 at Taj Mahal Hotel, New Delhi.

TOP NEWS

AR not Afar by SK Rahman

VISION 360



Shri Ram Nath Kovind, Hon'ble 14th President of India, addressing the gathering at TIOL Special Awards event.

TII LATEST

TIOLCORPLAWS LATEST