{"id":339665,"date":"2025-01-24T11:00:02","date_gmt":"2025-01-24T05:30:02","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=339665"},"modified":"2025-01-24T11:34:31","modified_gmt":"2025-01-24T06:04:31","slug":"bharti-airtel-judgment-analysis-implications-and-way-forward","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/01\/24\/bharti-airtel-judgment-analysis-implications-and-way-forward\/","title":{"rendered":"Bharti Airtel Judgment: Analysis, Implications and Way Forward"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n

T<\/span>he Supreme Court in Bharti Airtel Ltd.<\/span> v. CCE<\/span>1<\/sup><\/a> has significant implications for the telecommunication sector specifically concerning the availment of Central Value Added Tax (Cenvat<\/span>) credit on towers and shelters\/pre-fabricated buildings (PFBs) procured by the telecommunication companies for providing output services. Vide its judgment, the Supreme Court held that telecom companies are entitled to avail Cenvat<\/span> credit of excise duty paid on towers and shelters procured by them for providing output services.<\/p>\n

Background<\/h2>\n

Initially, there was a long-standing debate on whether these structures, viz. towers, shelters\/PFBs, etc. could be considered immovable property\/inputs\/capital goods, thus affecting their eligibility for Cenvat<\/span> credit. The Supreme Court has provided much-needed clarity by resolving the conflicting decisions of the Bombay High Court and the Delhi High Court.<\/p>\n

The Bombay High Court in Bharti Airtel Ltd.<\/span> v. CCE<\/span>2<\/sup><\/a> decided the issue in favour of the Revenue and held that upon affixation and fastening to the earth, the towers and shelters become immovable properties and therefore, denied Cenvat<\/span> credit of excise duty paid on towers and shelters procured for providing output services.<\/p>\n

However, the Delhi High Court in Vodafone Mobile Services Ltd.<\/span> v. CST<\/span>3<\/sup><\/a> took a contrary stand and held that the towers and shelters cannot be termed as immovable property and therefore, assessees are eligible to avail Cenvat<\/span> credit on towers and shelters.<\/p>\n

Supreme Court’s judgment: Key considerations<\/h2>\n

Aggrieved by the above judgments, the respective parties filed appeals before the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court, in its ruling, considered the statutory provisions, judicial precedents and the findings given by the High Courts in their impugned judgments and decided the following three crucial points:<\/p>\n

(i<\/span>) Towers and shelters are movable properties<\/span><\/p>\n

(a<\/span>) The Supreme Court applied various tests, viz. permanency, intendment, functionality and marketability tests as laid down in various judgments4<\/sup><\/a> to hold that the towers and shelters are not immovable but movable properties inasmuch as the towers and shelters can be dismantled and relocated in another site without causing any damage to the towers and shelters.<\/p>\n

(b<\/span>) It was noted that the towers are fixed to the land or building for enhancing the operational efficacy and proper functioning of the antenna affixed on the tower by making it stable and wobble free.<\/p>\n

(c<\/span>) The Supreme Court applied the functionality test, to hold that the attachment of towers to the earth\/building is not for the benefit of land\/building but only for the better function of the antenna which is mounted on the tower.<\/p>\n

(ii<\/span>) Towers and shelters qualify as “capital goods”<\/span><\/p>\n

(a<\/span>) The Supreme Court noted that the towers help in keeping the antenna at proper height and in a stable position so that the antenna can transmit signals uninterruptedly and seamlessly. Further, the shelters house, other base transceiver station (BTS) equipment\/diesel generator, which provide alternative and uninterrupted power supply to the antenna.<\/p>\n

(b<\/span>) It was therefore held that the towers and shelters are accessories to the antenna and BTS and therefore, were to be treated as capital goods in terms of sub-clause (iii<\/span>) of Rule 2(a<\/span>)(A) of the Central Value Added Tax (CENVAT) Credit Rules, 20045<\/sup><\/a>.<\/p>\n

(iii<\/span>) Towers and shelters qualify as “inputs”<\/span><\/p>\n

(a<\/span>) The Supreme Court held that the towers and shelters are items which are used for providing output services (i.e. mobile telecommunication services) inasmuch as without the towers and shelters, the service providers cannot provide such output services in an effective manner. Therefore, the use of towers and shelters in providing output service is not remote but proximate and the towers and shelters can be qualified as “inputs” under Rule 2(k<\/span>) of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 20046<\/sup><\/a>.<\/p>\n

Implications of the judgment of Supreme Court<\/h2>\n

(i) Implication under the service tax regime<\/p>\n

In light of the judgment of the Supreme Court, the Chhattisgarh High Court in BSNL<\/span> v. CCE & Customs<\/span>7<\/sup><\/a> allowed the appeal filed by the assessee and set aside the judgment of the Tribunal, wherein it was held that the assessee was not eligible to avail credit of excise duty paid on towers and shelters procured by them for providing output telecom services.<\/p>\n

(ii) Implication under the goods and services tax (GST) regime<\/p>\n

Further, the Delhi High Court in Bharti Airtel Ltd.<\/span> v. Commr. (CGST)<\/span>8<\/sup><\/a> disposed of a batch of writ petitions which involved common issue relating to availment of input tax credit of GST paid on the goods and services received by the assessees for setting up of towers and shelters. In the said case, the Department sought to deny such credit on the ground that the inputs\/input services are received and used for construction of immovable property and therefore, input tax credit is restricted as per the provisions of Section 17(5)<\/a>(d<\/span>) of the Central Goods and Services Tax (CGST) Act, 2017<\/a> and explanation to Section 17<\/a> of the CGST Act, 2017<\/a>.<\/p>\n

The Delhi High Court observed that the restriction envisaged under Section 17(5)<\/a>(d<\/span>) of the CGST Act, 2017<\/a> would apply only if the towers and shelters qualify as immovable property. Thereafter, the Court relied upon the judgment of the Supreme Court and noted that since the towers and shelters are movable property, they would not fall within the ambit of Section 17(5)<\/a>(d<\/span>) of the CGST Act, 2017<\/a> and thus, the denial of input tax credit to the assessees would not sustain.<\/p>\n

Way forward under tax laws<\/h2>\n

The judgment of the Supreme Court in Bharti Airtel<\/span> Ltd. case<\/span>9<\/sup><\/a> is likely to have a positive impact on several matters pending before different forums, viz. the Supreme Court, High Court, tribunals. Vandana Global batch<\/span>10<\/sup><\/a> currently pending before the Supreme Court, is one of the cases likely to benefit from the judgment of the Supreme Court.<\/p>\n

In the said case11<\/sup><\/a>, the larger Bench of the Tribunal dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee and denied the availment of credit inter alia on the ground that the steel items, viz. angles, joints, beams, channels, etc., used in the construction work, results into structures, which are permanently embedded to the earth. Thus, they cannot be qualified as “goods” and therefore, cannot be qualified as “capital goods”. The judgment of the larger Bench of the Tribunal was reversed by the Chhattisgarh High Court12<\/sup><\/a> against which, an appeal was filed by the Department before the Supreme Court which was dismissed on the ground of low tax effect.<\/p>\n

However, Bharti Airtel Ltd.<\/span> judgment13<\/sup><\/a> may have a positive implication on a batch of matters14<\/sup><\/a> still pending before the Supreme Court, on the similar issue.<\/p>\n

Further, the judgment of Bharti Airtel Ltd. case<\/span>15<\/sup><\/a> will also be helpful in determining the eligibility of assessees to avail credit of duty paid on the construction of the following items affixed on the earth through nuts and bolts under both erstwhile regime as well as the GST regime:<\/p>\n

(a<\/span>) Storage tanks and silos.<\/p>\n

(b<\/span>) Pre-fabricated buildings.<\/p>\n

(c<\/span>) Shelters and other structural supports.<\/p>\n

(d<\/span>) Aluminium cabins, etc.<\/p>\n

Way forward under other laws<\/h2>\n

The effect of the judgment of Supreme Court will also have wide ramifications on the following laws:<\/p>\n

(a<\/span>) Property tax<\/span>: The ratio regarding movability of mobile towers as laid down by the Supreme Court in Bharti Airtel Ltd. case<\/span>16<\/sup><\/a> may also have impact on levy of property tax by the State Legislature, particularly, when the Supreme Court in Ahmedabad Municipal Corpn.<\/span> v. GTL Infrastructure Ltd.<\/span>17<\/sup><\/a>, has held that mobile tower forms part of the “building” for the purposes of Entry 49 of List II18<\/sup><\/a> of the Seventh Schedule19<\/sup><\/a> to the Constitution<\/a>20<\/sup><\/a>.<\/p>\n

The Telecommunications Act, 2023<\/a>21<\/sup><\/a><\/p>\n

Notably, the Parliament enacted the Telecommunication Act, 2023<\/a> (Telecom Act) wherein, Section 14(3)<\/a>22<\/sup><\/a><\/span> of the Telecom Act, 2023<\/a> (effective from 26-6-2024) stipulated that the telecom towers installed on any property shall not be considered to be a part of such property for the purpose of leviability of any property tax, levy, cess, fees or duties as may be applicable on that property.<\/p>\n

Furthermore, to provide consistency with other laws, Section 52(2)<\/a>23<\/sup><\/a> of the Telecom Act, 2023<\/a> provides that in case of conflict between the provision of the Telecom Act, 2023<\/a> and any other law, the provision of the Telecom Act, 2023<\/a> will prevail.<\/p>\n

Therefore, in light of the above provisions, it will be interesting to see the interplay of the ratio laid down by the Supreme Court in Ahmedabad Municipal Corpn. case<\/span>24<\/sup><\/a> and Bharti Airtel Ltd. case<\/span>25<\/sup><\/a> in accordance with Section 14<\/a>26<\/sup><\/a> of the Telecom Act, 2023<\/a>.<\/p>\n

(a<\/span>) The Building and Other Construction Workers’ (Regulation of Employment and Conditions of Service) Act, 1996<\/a>27<\/sup><\/a> (BOCW Act): In various States, the Tax Department has issued\/passed assessment notices\/order against the telecom companies demanding them to deposit one per cent cess of the cost of expenditure incurred by them in erection and installation of the mobile towers. Notably, in terms of Section 2(1)<\/a>(d<\/span>)28<\/sup><\/a> of the BOCW Act, 1996<\/a>, to qualify as “building or other construction work”, there must be some activity of construction carried out in respect of the structures specified thereunder. Further, the Supreme Court in U.P. Power Transmission Corpn. Ltd.<\/span> v. CG Power and Industrial Solutions Ltd.<\/span>29<\/sup><\/a> also held that the civil work not qualifying under the ambit of construction work do not attract the levy of cess amount under the BOCW Act, 1996<\/a>.<\/p>\n

The telecom companies have challenged these assessment notices\/orders before the High Courts inter alia on the ground that telecom towers are temporary structures which are erected and installed with the help of nuts and bolts to provide wobble free operations. Therefore, as there is no “construction work” which is undertaken by the telecom companies, the erection and installation of the telecom towers will not be covered within the definition of “building and other construction work”. The judgment of the Supreme Court in Bharti Airtel Ltd. case<\/span>30<\/sup><\/a> may also strengthen the arguments taken by the assessees on these matters pending before the High Courts.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n\n

*Partner, LKS.<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

**Associate, LKS.<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

1.<\/a> (2024) 132 GSTR 404 : 2024 SCC OnLine SC 3374<\/a>.<\/p>\n

2.<\/a> (2014) 1 HCC (Bom) 68 : 2014 SCC OnLine Bom 907<\/a>.<\/p>\n

3.<\/a> (2019) 67 GSTR 434 : 2018 SCC OnLine Del 12302<\/a>.<\/p>\n

4.<\/a> CCE<\/span> v. Solid and Correct Engg. Works<\/span>, (2010) 5 SCC 122<\/a>; Triveni Engg. & Industries Ltd.<\/span> v. CCE<\/span>, (2000) 7 SCC 29<\/a>; Sirpur Paper Mills Ltd.<\/span> v. Collector of Central Excise<\/span>, (1998) 1 SCC 400<\/a>; Mittal Engg. Works (P) Ltd.<\/span> v. Collector of Central Excise<\/span>, (1997) 1 SCC 203<\/a> and T.T.G. Industries Ltd.<\/span> v. Collector of Central Excise<\/span>, (2004) 4 SCC 751<\/a>.<\/p>\n

5.<\/a> CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004.<\/p>\n

6.<\/a> CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004, R. 2(k<\/span>).<\/p>\n

7.<\/a> BSNL<\/span> v. CCE & Customs<\/span>, Tax Case No. 33\/2018, Order dated 13-12-2024 (Chhattisgarh High Court).<\/p>\n

8.<\/a> 2024 SCC OnLine Del 8935<\/a>.<\/p>\n

9.<\/a> (2024) 132 GSTR 404 : 2024 SCC OnLine SC 3374<\/a>.<\/p>\n

10.<\/a> SLP (C) No. 18266\/2018 disposed of vide Order dated 20-9-2024 in Civil Appeal No. 7272 of 2005 due to low tax effect.<\/p>\n

11.<\/a> Vandana Global Ltd.<\/span> v. CCE<\/span>, 2010 SCC On Line CESTAT 4520.<\/p>\n

12.<\/a> Vandana Global Ltd.<\/span> v. CCE & Customs<\/span>, 2017 SCC OnLine Chh 1615<\/a>.<\/p>\n

13.<\/a> (2024) 132 GSTR 404 : 2024 SCC OnLine SC 3374<\/a>.<\/p>\n

14.<\/a> CCE & Customs<\/span> v. Adani Ports and SEZ Ltd.<\/span>, SLP (C) No. 33238\/2015.<\/p>\n

15.<\/a> (2024) 132 GSTR 404 : 2024 SCC OnLine SC 3374<\/a>.<\/p>\n

16.<\/a> (2024) 132 GSTR 404 : 2024 SCC OnLine SC 3374<\/a>.<\/p>\n

17.<\/a> (2017) 3 SCC 545<\/a>.<\/p>\n

18.<\/a> List II— State List: 49. Taxes on lands and building.<\/p>\n

19.<\/a> Constitution of India<\/a>, Sch. 7<\/a>.<\/p>\n

20.<\/a> Constitution of India<\/a>.<\/p>\n

21.<\/a> Telecommunications Act, 2023<\/a>.<\/p>\n

22.<\/a> Telecommunications Act, 2023<\/a>, S. 14(3)<\/a>.<\/p>\n

23.<\/a> Telecommunications Act, 2023<\/a>, S. 52(2)<\/a>.<\/p>\n

24.<\/a> (2017) 3 SCC 545<\/a>.<\/p>\n

25.<\/a> (2024) 132 GSTR 404 : 2024 SCC OnLine SC 3374<\/a>.<\/p>\n

26.<\/a> Telecommunications Act, 2023<\/a>, S. 14<\/a>.<\/p>\n

27.<\/a> Building and Other Construction Workers’ (Regulation of Employment and Conditions of Service) Act, 1996<\/a>.<\/p>\n

28.<\/a> Building and Other Construction Workers’ (Regulation of Employment and Conditions of Service) Act, 1996<\/a>, S. 2(1)<\/a>(d<\/span>).<\/p>\n

29.<\/a> (2021) 6 SCC 15<\/a>.<\/p>\n

30.<\/a> (2024) 132 GSTR 404 : 2024 SCC OnLine SC 3374<\/a>.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

by Yogendra Aldak* and Yatharth Tripathi**<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":8808,"featured_media":339676,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[20271,54388],"tags":[77843,77848,35528,77845,31791,32436,19301,77847,77846,77849,5363,77844],"class_list":["post-339665","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-experts_corner","category-lakshmikumaran-sridharan","tag-analysis","tag-base-transceiver-station","tag-bharti-airtel","tag-central-value-added-tax","tag-cenvat","tag-cenvat-credit-rules","tag-implications","tag-pfbs","tag-pre-fabricated-buildings","tag-shelters-house","tag-supreme-court","tag-way-forward"],"yoast_head":"\nBharti Airtel Judgment: Analysis, Implications and Way Forward | SCC Times<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"Supreme Court in Bharti Airtel Ltd. v. CCE1 has significant implications for the telecommunication sector specifically concerning the availment of Central Value Added Tax\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/01\/24\/bharti-airtel-judgment-analysis-implications-and-way-forward\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Bharti Airtel Judgment: Analysis, Implications and Way Forward\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Supreme Court in Bharti Airtel Ltd. v. CCE1 has significant implications for the telecommunication sector specifically concerning the availment of Central Value Added Tax\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/01\/24\/bharti-airtel-judgment-analysis-implications-and-way-forward\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"SCC Times\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2025-01-24T05:30:02+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2025-01-24T06:04:31+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/01\/Bharti-Airtel-Judgment.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"886\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"590\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Bhumika Indulia\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:title\" content=\"Bharti Airtel Judgment: Analysis, Implications and Way Forward\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Bhumika Indulia\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"9 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/01\/24\/bharti-airtel-judgment-analysis-implications-and-way-forward\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/01\/24\/bharti-airtel-judgment-analysis-implications-and-way-forward\/\",\"name\":\"Bharti Airtel Judgment: Analysis, Implications and Way Forward | SCC Times\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/01\/24\/bharti-airtel-judgment-analysis-implications-and-way-forward\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/01\/24\/bharti-airtel-judgment-analysis-implications-and-way-forward\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/01\/Bharti-Airtel-Judgment.webp\",\"datePublished\":\"2025-01-24T05:30:02+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2025-01-24T06:04:31+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a\"},\"description\":\"Supreme Court in Bharti Airtel Ltd. v. CCE1 has significant implications for the telecommunication sector specifically concerning the availment of Central Value Added Tax\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/01\/24\/bharti-airtel-judgment-analysis-implications-and-way-forward\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/01\/24\/bharti-airtel-judgment-analysis-implications-and-way-forward\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/01\/24\/bharti-airtel-judgment-analysis-implications-and-way-forward\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/01\/Bharti-Airtel-Judgment.webp\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/01\/Bharti-Airtel-Judgment.webp\",\"width\":886,\"height\":590,\"caption\":\"Bharti Airtel Judgment\"},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/01\/24\/bharti-airtel-judgment-analysis-implications-and-way-forward\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Bharti Airtel Judgment: Analysis, Implications and Way Forward\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\",\"name\":\"SCC Times\",\"description\":\"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a\",\"name\":\"Bhumika Indulia\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Me-150x150.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Me-150x150.jpg\",\"caption\":\"Bhumika Indulia\"},\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_1\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Bharti Airtel Judgment: Analysis, Implications and Way Forward | SCC Times","description":"Supreme Court in Bharti Airtel Ltd. v. CCE1 has significant implications for the telecommunication sector specifically concerning the availment of Central Value Added Tax","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/01\/24\/bharti-airtel-judgment-analysis-implications-and-way-forward\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Bharti Airtel Judgment: Analysis, Implications and Way Forward","og_description":"Supreme Court in Bharti Airtel Ltd. v. CCE1 has significant implications for the telecommunication sector specifically concerning the availment of Central Value Added Tax","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/01\/24\/bharti-airtel-judgment-analysis-implications-and-way-forward\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2025-01-24T05:30:02+00:00","article_modified_time":"2025-01-24T06:04:31+00:00","og_image":[{"width":886,"height":590,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/01\/Bharti-Airtel-Judgment.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Bhumika Indulia","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_title":"Bharti Airtel Judgment: Analysis, Implications and Way Forward","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Bhumika Indulia","Est. reading time":"9 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/01\/24\/bharti-airtel-judgment-analysis-implications-and-way-forward\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/01\/24\/bharti-airtel-judgment-analysis-implications-and-way-forward\/","name":"Bharti Airtel Judgment: Analysis, Implications and Way Forward | SCC Times","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/01\/24\/bharti-airtel-judgment-analysis-implications-and-way-forward\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/01\/24\/bharti-airtel-judgment-analysis-implications-and-way-forward\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/01\/Bharti-Airtel-Judgment.webp","datePublished":"2025-01-24T05:30:02+00:00","dateModified":"2025-01-24T06:04:31+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a"},"description":"Supreme Court in Bharti Airtel Ltd. v. CCE1 has significant implications for the telecommunication sector specifically concerning the availment of Central Value Added Tax","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/01\/24\/bharti-airtel-judgment-analysis-implications-and-way-forward\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/01\/24\/bharti-airtel-judgment-analysis-implications-and-way-forward\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/01\/24\/bharti-airtel-judgment-analysis-implications-and-way-forward\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/01\/Bharti-Airtel-Judgment.webp","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/01\/Bharti-Airtel-Judgment.webp","width":886,"height":590,"caption":"Bharti Airtel Judgment"},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/01\/24\/bharti-airtel-judgment-analysis-implications-and-way-forward\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Bharti Airtel Judgment: Analysis, Implications and Way Forward"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/","name":"SCC Times","description":"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a","name":"Bhumika Indulia","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Me-150x150.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Me-150x150.jpg","caption":"Bhumika Indulia"},"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_1\/"}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/01\/Bharti-Airtel-Judgment.webp","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":335775,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/11\/23\/explained-cenvat-credit-for-msps-mobile-towers-pfbs-sc-legal-news\/","url_meta":{"origin":339665,"position":0},"title":"Explained | SC decision on availability of CENVAT Credit to MSPs for erection of mobile towers and PFBs","author":"Sucheta","date":"November 23, 2024","format":false,"excerpt":"The High Courts of Bombay and Delhi had rendered two opposing verdicts on the issue. One view favoured the Revenue while the other one was in favour of the Mobile Service Providers.","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"MSPs CENVAT credit mobile towers","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/MSPs-CENVAT-credit-mobile-towers.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/MSPs-CENVAT-credit-mobile-towers.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/MSPs-CENVAT-credit-mobile-towers.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/MSPs-CENVAT-credit-mobile-towers.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":295185,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/06\/22\/assessee-not-entitled-total-contract-value-remit-service-tax-as-works-contract-service-supreme-court\/","url_meta":{"origin":339665,"position":1},"title":"Can assessee take total contract value and remit service tax on value as \u2018works contract service\u2019? Supreme Court answers","author":"Apoorva","date":"June 22, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"As the service tax needs to be computed in terms of Rule 2A of the Service Tax (Determination of Value) Rules, 2006 and as the assessee has not opted for the composition scheme, the matter is remitted back to the CESTAT for re-computation of the demands.","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"works contract service","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/06\/works-contract-service.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/06\/works-contract-service.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/06\/works-contract-service.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/06\/works-contract-service.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":336537,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/12\/04\/experts-corner-movability-trait-property-tax-implications-itc\/","url_meta":{"origin":339665,"position":2},"title":"Shades of Immovability: Supreme Court Delineates the Distinction between Movable and Immovable Property for Tax Purposes","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"December 4, 2024","format":false,"excerpt":"by Tarun Jain*","rel":"","context":"In "Experts Corner"","block_context":{"text":"Experts Corner","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/experts_corner\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Property tax implication","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/12\/Property-tax-implication.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/12\/Property-tax-implication.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/12\/Property-tax-implication.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/12\/Property-tax-implication.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":253023,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/08\/20\/input-services-2\/","url_meta":{"origin":339665,"position":3},"title":"CESTAT | Can input services used by the provider of taxable service for providing output service be covered by the exclusion clause? Tribunal answers","author":"Editor","date":"August 20, 2021","format":false,"excerpt":"Customs, Excise and Services Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT): SS. Garg (Judicial Member) allowed appeals which were filed after the rejection of refund claims on various input services. Appellant was a company registered under the Companies Act and was a wholly owned subsidiary of Microsoft Corporation, USA. They had entered into\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/09\/CESTAT-Taxscan.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/09\/CESTAT-Taxscan.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/09\/CESTAT-Taxscan.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/09\/CESTAT-Taxscan.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/09\/CESTAT-Taxscan.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":260684,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/01\/27\/whether-the-assessee-will-be-liable-to-reverse-cenvat-credit-on-the-amount-written-off-as-bad-debts\/","url_meta":{"origin":339665,"position":4},"title":"Is there any provision under Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 or Finance Act, 1994 for reversal of CENVAT credit for services provided for which no consideration is received by an assessee? CESTAT analyses","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"January 27, 2022","format":false,"excerpt":"Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chandigarh: Coram of Ashok Jindal (Judicial Member) and CJ Mathew (Technical Member) addressed whether the assessee will be liable to reverse CENVAT credit on the amount written off as bad debts. Two appeals were filed against the impugned orders confirming the demand for\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/01\/CESTAT_NEWpng.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/01\/CESTAT_NEWpng.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/01\/CESTAT_NEWpng.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/01\/CESTAT_NEWpng.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/01\/CESTAT_NEWpng.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":337762,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/12\/23\/delhi-high-court-quashes-gst-demand-telecommunication-towers-not-immovanble-property-cgst-act-legal-news\/","url_meta":{"origin":339665,"position":5},"title":"Telecommunication towers not ‘immovable property’ under Section 17(5)(d) of CGST Act; Delhi High Court quashes ₹5454 crore GST demand","author":"Arunima","date":"December 23, 2024","format":false,"excerpt":"The expression \u201cplant and machinery\u201d has been defined by the Explanation appearing in Section 17(5) of CGST Act to mean apparatus, equipment and machinery fixed to earth by foundation or structural support. However, it specifically excludes telecommunication towers from the ambit of the expression \u201cplant and machinery\u201d.","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Delhi High Court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Delhi-High-Court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Delhi-High-Court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Delhi-High-Court.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Delhi-High-Court.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]}],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/339665","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/8808"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=339665"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/339665\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/339676"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=339665"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=339665"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=339665"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}