9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (2) TMI 733X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... inding that the Petitioner cannot be considered as an agent of the NHAI. In the impugned decision, the Respondent has not dealt with the implications of this finding of the Tribunal. The Respondent- Commissioner had posed this question to himself in the order; however, thereafter, we do not find any declaration as to what is the implication of the earlier decision of the Tribunal and as to whether the finding of the status of the Petitioner would lose its meaning after the introduction of the new regime. The Commissioner has only referred to different periods under which the demands have been made, however, without any discussion about whether it would rule out the earlier finding of the Tribunal. According to us, this specific finding on t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... unal in the Petitioner's own case and, therefore, interference in writ jurisdiction is warranted. We find merit in this contention and, consequently, the prayer for remand. That being the limited ambit of the matter, it is not necessary to detail the facts of the case. 2. Briefly stated, the Petitioner is a company engaged in the business of acquisition of user fee collection rights of toll roads. The Petitioner had entered into an agreement with the National Highway Authority of India, a body constituted under the National Highways Authority Act, 1988. The National Highway Authority of India (NHAI) develops and maintains national highways and collects toll fees on behalf of the Central Government. The NHAI invited bids from intereste ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... de, leaving it to the Revenue to take the proceeding further. The learned counsel for the Respondent submits that the entire issue as to the liability of the toll agency to pay service tax is pending before the Hon'ble Supreme Court as the Revenue has approached the Hon'ble Supreme Court against the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Ashoka Buildcon Ltd. v. Commissioner of Service Tax, Nashik 2017 (49) S.T.R. 404 (Tri.-Mumbai). 5. The Respondent- Commissioner in the impugned order, while considering the liability of the Petitioner to pay service tax, also posed a question which the Petitioner treated as the main issue as to whether the agreement between the Petitioner and the NHAI is for collection of toll charges and is a co ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n the impugned decision, the Respondent has not dealt with the implications of this finding of the Tribunal. The Respondent- Commissioner had posed this question to himself in the order; however, thereafter, we do not find any declaration as to what is the implication of the earlier decision of the Tribunal and as to whether the finding of the status of the Petitioner would lose its meaning after the introduction of the new regime. The Commissioner has only referred to different periods under which the demands have been made, however, without any discussion about whether it would rule out the earlier finding of the Tribunal. 7. According to us, this specific finding on the status of the Petitioner given in the Petitioner's own case by ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
