out in paragraph 2 of the impugned judgment. “2. Learned senior counsel for the appellant submits that there are two aspects, which are required to be examined in the present appeal: i) The allowing of the claims of the respondent on account of increase in royalty, sales tax and in the forest transit fee, stated to have been imposed by subsequent legislations; 5 (2022) 4 SCC 116 Civil Appeal no.4702 of 2023 etc. Page 10 of 15ii) The allowing of the claim for balance amount for construction of embankment which according to the appellant, formed a part of the activity of clearing and grubbing and was not payable as embankment work.” 11. The Division Bench held that the imposition of a tax or upward revision of an already existing tax or levy through subsequent legislation is admittedly akin to the levy of additional royalty. The Division Bench relied upon a decision of the same Court in the case of the National Highways Authority of India v. M/s. ITD Cementation India Limited1. The