The Supreme Court has dismissed the Revenue Department’s Special Leave Petition (SLP) challenging a Delhi High Court verdict that classified mobile telecom towers as “plant and machinery,” making them eligible for input tax credit (ITC) under the Goods and Services Tax (GST) framework.
A bench of Justice Pankaj Mithal and Justice Prasanna B. Varale refused to admit the SLP filed in the case of Bharti Airtel, thereby affirming the Delhi High Court’s ruling. The apex court also rejected the Revenue’s attempt to draw a distinction between the treatment of telecom towers under the earlier service tax regime and the GST regime, terming such arguments as unnecessary “hair-splitting.”
Core Dispute
The case revolved around whether telecom towers — typically installed on land or rooftops — should be treated as immovable property, which is blocked from ITC under Section 17(5) of the CGST Act, 2017, or as “plant and machinery,” which is expressly excluded from the blocked credit provisions.
The Delhi High Court had earlier sided with Bharti Airtel and other telecom operators, ruling that telecom towers meet the definition of “plant and machinery” and are therefore entitled to ITC. The Revenue Department had denied this claim, insisting the towers were immovable assets and thus ineligible for credit.
Arguments and Representation
Senior Advocates Arvind P. Datar and Balbir Singh, assisted by Advocates V. Lakshmikumaran, Kumar Visalaksh, and Udit Jain of Economic Laws Practice, represented Bharti Airtel and other petitioners. Datar argued that both pre-GST and post-GST legislation have consistently restricted ITC only for immovable property — a category that does not include telecom towers. He also highlighted that the Supreme Court had previously resolved the same question in Bharti Airtel’s favour under the service tax regime.
For the Revenue, Senior Advocate Rupesh Kumar advanced arguments to uphold the department’s restrictive interpretation of ITC eligibility. However, the court sided with the assessee, delivering a clear message against narrowing credit provisions through interpretive technicalities.
With this ruling, telecom operators can continue to claim ITC on telecom towers, a decision expected to have significant financial implications for the industry.
Case Details
Case Title: COMMISSIONER, CGST Versus BHARTI AIRTEL LIMITED
Case No.: Diary No. 35416/2025
Date: 08-08-2025
Counsel For Petitioner: N.venkataraman, A.S.G.
Counsel For Respondent: Arvind P. Datar, Sr. Adv.
Read More: Peeled, Chopped & Packed Garlic Exempt from GST: AAR
