9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (6) TMI 1410X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... held ' The appellant is, therefore, justified in asserting that the Agreement executed between the appellant and the government is for supply of water for which charges are paid by the appellant on the basis of volume of water drawn and it is not a case of assignment of right to use natural resources of the government.' As the issue in this case has been examined by this Tribunal in the case of Sasan Power Limited, it is held that the payment made by the appellant for water charges, is not liable to be service tax during the impugned period for allocation/auction of natural resources - the appellant is not liable to pay the service tax on water charges paid by them. The impugned order is set aside - appeal allowed. - Hon ble Mr. A ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ded period of limitation. 2.3 The appellant contested the show-cause notice, but the adjudicating authority confirmed the demand against the appellant. 2.4 Aggrieved from the said order, the appellant is before us. 3. The ld. Counsel for the appellant submits that the issue involved in this case stands settled by this Tribunal in the case of Sasan Power Limited Vs. Commissioner of CGST Excise, Jabbalpur vide Final Order No. 55672/2024 dated 30.04.2024. Therefore, the impugned order is to be set aside. 4. On the other hand, the ld. A.R. for the Revenue, reiterated the findings of the adjudicating authority. 5. Heard both the parties and considered the submissions. 6. We find that the issue involved in this matter is whether the appellant is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pted supply of water during and the government also would not be responsible for non supply or inadequate supply of water as a result of any event of Force Majeure. The appellant has to pay water rates/water charges depending on the quantity of water drawn by the appellant. The Agreement also deals with a situation where there can be reduction or shortage in the water supply. This clearly means that the Agreement is for supply of water and not mere access to water source. 18. It is, therefore, more than apparent that the Agreement is for supply of water by the government to the appellant and is not for assignment of any right to the appellant to use the natural resources of the government. 19. The appellant is, therefore, justified in asser ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
