DBL Villuppuram Highways Limited Vs Union of India (Madras High Court)
The Hon’ble High Court of Madras set aside the demand order and remitted the matter back for reconsideration. It held: (i) services provided on HAM basis cannot be compared with EPC contracts; (ii) as per circular dated 26.06.2024 issued by CBIC, it has been clarified that HAM contract is a continuous supply of service; the circular is issued under section 168 of the Act and is clarificatory in nature; (iii) the matter requires reconsideration in light of the circular as it was issued after the impugned order came to be passed; (iv) lifts the bank attachment.
The petitioner is a concessionaire. It was awarded a contract by NHAI. The contract was on Hybrid annuity model (HAM) basis. It includes design, constitution, operation and maintenance of roads. The payment was on annuity basis. A demand of GST was raised on the ground that supply is complete and in terms of section 31 of the Act, time of supply has occurred. Such demand was challenged in writ petition.
The Hon’ble High Court of Madras set aside the demand order and remitted the matter back for reconsideration. It held: (i) services provided on HAM basis cannot be compared with EPC contracts; (ii) as per circular dated 26.06.2024 issued by CBIC, it has been clarified that HAM contract is a continuous supply of service; the circular is issued under section 168 of the Act and is clarificatory in nature; (iii) the matter requires reconsideration in light of the circular as it was issued after the impugned order came to be passed; (iv) lifts the bank attachment.
