Page 71 - GSTL_18th June 2020_Vol 37_Part 3

2020 ] NUTAN ISPAT AND POWER PVT. LTD. v. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH 285
2(105) of CGST Act, 2017 defines the term “Supplier”, in relation to any goods or
services or both, to mean that the person supplying the said goods or services or
both, shall include an agent acting on behalf of such supplier in relation to the
goods or services or both.
8. However, at this juncture, Learned Counsel for the respondents have
taken a stand by filing their respective pleadings that the Royalty Contractor
(ERCC Contractor) are being appointed by the Government exclusively for col-
lecting royalty on behalf of the Government from the mining lease holders of
natural resources without supply of such natural resources.
9. Learned Counsel for the respondents have further clarified that the
royalty paid for mining activities as chargeable under the notification dated 28-6-
2017 provides that the lease holders are required to pay the GST under the re-
verse charge mechanism.
10. It is contended by Learned Counsel for the respondents that les-
see/lease holders will continue to submit and follow the existing procedure for
filing of GST Returns, and payment of GST under the reverse charge mechanism
is according to the provisions of law. It is further contended that the liabilities of
lessee/lease holders will not be affected by the amended notification dated 26-7-
2018.
11. Once, the reverse charge mechanism itself has not been contested
by the respondents and it is an accepted proposition and the same is further
supported by the pleadings filed by the respective respondent parties, we do not
find any reason to make any further adjudication in the matter.
12. In light of the aforesaid submission and upon such stand of the re-
spondents, the present writ petitions are allowed and the letter dated 8-11-2017
issued by the Finance (Tax) Department, Government of Rajasthan is hereby
quashed and set aside. However, if any letter has been issued in pursuance of the
letter dated 8-11-2017, the same shall also stand quashed accordingly.

_______

2020 (37) G.S.T.L. 285 (Chhattisgarh)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF CHHATTISGARH AT
BILASPUR
P. Sam Koshy, J.
NUTAN ISPAT AND POWER PVT. LTD.

Versus
STATE OF CHHATTISGARH
Writ Petition (T) No. 45 of 2020, decided on 28-2-2020
Appeal to Appellate Authority - Non-speaking order - Appellate Au-
thority in the impugned Order although reproduced most of the grounds
raised by petitioner in their Appeal but literally considered only the factual
aspects of the case, that is, the date on which the Petitioner was supposed to
submit their return and the defaults on the part of the Petitioner and the factu-
al details in respect of the statutory provisions as is required - Appellate Au-
GST LAW TIMES  18th June 2020  71