9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (10) TMI 1030X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... submit that time to respond to the show cause notice has already expired, at this stage it would be prudent to permit the petitioners to respond to the show cause notice. Accordingly, time to respond to the show cause notice is extended till 4th November 2024. List this matter under the same heading for further consideration on 12th November 2024. - RAJA BASU CHOWDHURY, J. For the petitioners : Mr. Ankit Kanodia Ms. Megha Agarwal Mr. Piyush Khaitan. For the respondent no. 1: Mr. Bhaskar Prosad Banerjee Mr. Tapan Bhanja. For the respondent nos. 2 and 3: Mr. Uday Shankar Bhattacharya Mr. Tapan Bhanja. For the Union of India : Mr. Smarajit Roychowdhury Mr. Prithu Dudhoria. For the NHAI : Mr. Manika Roy Ms. Shinjita Ray. 1. Challenging a sho ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cording to the petitioners after introduction of the GST regime with effect from 1st July 2017, the petitioners received a total of Rs.277.50 crore as annuity payments between July 2017 to December 2019, before the project was handed over to NHAI. The petitioners claim that the services provided by way of access to a road or a bridge on payment of toll charges were always exempt from GST vide Entry 23A of Notification 12/2017 Central tax (Rate) dated 28th June 2017. Having regard thereto, and considering the GST exemption introduced in respect of annuity on 23rd October 2017, the NHAI vide its policy circular no. 3.3.17, clarified GST will not be applicable on any payments made by NHAI, as such no payment was made against GST. According to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ing to him, no interference is been called for by this Court. 6. Mr. Bhattacharya, learned advocate enters appearance on behalf of the respondent nos. 2 and 3. Mr. Roychowdhury, learned advocate enters appearance on behalf of the Union of India. 7. Heard the learned advocates appearing for the respective parties and considered the materials on record. 8. Ordinarily, in relation to a challenge to the show cause notice, no interference is called for. However, taking note of the fact that a jurisdictional issue has been raised, I am of the view that the matter may require further consideration. However, since, the parties submit that time to respond to the show cause notice has already expired, I am of the view that at this stage it would be p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
