TMI Blog2013 (3) TMI 379X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he service rendered by the appellant to NHAI appeared to be classifiable under ‘business auxiliary service. This activity was outsourced by NHAI by engaging agents for collection of toll on their behalf. It is not a statutory levy and NHAI was not performing a statutory function As has been held by Tribunal in the case of Parasrampuria Indus. Ltd.(2011 (2) TMI 535 - CESTAT, MUMBAI ), unless th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Finance Act, 1994 read with Section 35F of the Central Excise Act, 1944 within a period of 8 weeks and report compliance on or before 15-12-2011. 2. Ld. counsel for the appellant submits that the amount of pre-deposit of Rs. 45t lakhs is in respect of the period of 1-1-2006 to 31-1-2007 and during this period the appellant had a toll rights contract with NHAI whereunder the appellant acquir ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that this Tribunal passed the order after considering all the arguments adduced by both the sides and there is no change in circumstance or new development that has taken place after passing of the stay order, and therefore the modification application is not maintainable as held by this Tribunal in the case of Parasrampuria Indus. Ltd. - 2011 (267) E.L.T. 549. The ld. AR also submits that the sa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ting the same to NHAI and getting a commission, the appellant has collected the toll and kept the same with themselves the paid to NHAI a pre-agreed amount towards toll collection charges. It cannot, therefore, be prima facie said that the appellant is not engaged in collection of toll on behalf of NHAI. Under the statute, it is NHAI who is empowered to collect the toll and not the appellant. This ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
