The Supreme Court has closed out a long-running GST dispute that telecom infrastructure operators have been tracking closely, dismissing review petitions filed by the Commissioner, CGST Appeal-1, Delhi against Bharti Airtel Ltd., Indus Towers Ltd. and Elevar Digitel Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. A Bench of Justice Vikram Nath and Justice Prasanna B. Varale held that there was no error apparent on the face of the record that would warrant reconsideration of the Court's earlier order dated 8 August 2025, which had itself declined to interfere with a Delhi High Court ruling in the telecom companies' favour.
The underlying dispute went back to a Delhi High Court judgment that examined whether telecommunication towers — steel lattice structures bolted to concrete foundations or building rooftops — could be treated as "immovable property" under GST law, which would have blocked the companies from claiming input tax credit on the goods and services used to build them. Applying the traditional multi-factor test used to distinguish movable from immovable property — the nature and object of annexation, the degree of permanency, the intention of the parties, functionality and marketability — the High Court held that telecom towers are movable and qualify as "plant and machinery," making ITC available on them. On that basis, the High Court had quashed the tax department's orders against Bharti Airtel and set aside show-cause notices issued to Indus Towers and Elevar Digitel Infrastructure. The Department's challenge to that ruling was rejected by the Supreme Court in August 2025, and the review petitions decided this month were the Department's attempt to have that dismissal reconsidered.
Review jurisdiction under Order XLVII of the Code of Civil Procedure is narrow by design — it is available only where there is an error apparent on the face of the record, not simply because a party disagrees with the outcome. Finding no such error, the Bench dismissed the Department's review petitions, which leaves the Delhi High Court's "plant and machinery" classification of telecom towers as settled law so far as these proceedings are concerned, and forecloses a further roll of the dice for the Revenue on this specific point through the review route.
For telecom operators and tower infrastructure companies, the practical effect is that the multi-crore ITC claims built up over successive tax periods on tower installation and related capital expenditure now stand on considerably firmer ground. Businesses in adjacent capital-intensive, fixed-asset sectors — where the department has run similar "immovable property" arguments to deny ITC on plant, equipment or structural installations — should also take note: the movable/immovable classification test applied here is likely to be cited well beyond the telecom sector in future GST assessments and appeals.