|
| SC sends arbitration appeal to Singhbhum judge |
| BS Reporter / New Delhi May 25, 2009, 00:34 IST |
|
The Supreme Court last week sent the arbitration dispute between Hindustan Copper Limited and Nicco Corporation to the district judge of East Singhbhum. HCL had approached the Supreme Court arguing that since the original arbitrator was appointed by the Jharkhand high court, it should hear its objection to the award. The Supreme Court ruled that the civil judge of Singhbhum district has the jurisdiction to hear the challenge to the award under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act.
Repayment of loan not end of criminal case
The Supreme Court has set aside the judgment of the Madras high court and declared that mere repayment of a loan according to a settlement scheme would not exempt a person who has cheated a bank from criminal proceedings. The high court had quashed action by the CBI against A Ravishankar Prasad and A Manohar Parasad stating that they had settled their dues to the tune of Rs 157 crore to Indian Bank, though they had been charged with forgery and fabrication of documents. The debt recovery tribunal had dismissed the complaint as settled out of court. The high court then quashed the complaint because of the settlement. The CBI appeal to the Supreme Court. It stated that the high court should not have exercised its discretionary power to quash proceedings when there is a prima facie case for prosecution. It was alleged in the complaint that the accused persons had conspired with the CMD of the bank, Chennai, for recommending, sanctioning and disbursing of huge credit facilities.
Reinstatement of Hindusthan Antibiotics workers
The Supreme Court has upheld the Madhya Pradesh High Court's judgement that asked ailing Hindusthan Antibiotics Ltd to reinstate its employees with full wages since their retrenchment in 1986. The state-owned company, which manufactures various life- saving antibiotics in Pune, had closed down its Jabalpur branch in 1986 after retrenching some casual employees.
Customs and Central Excise told to reconsider orders
The Supreme Court has set aside two orders of the Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal in the case of Rajasthan Spinning & Weaving Mills and Lanco Industries Ltd and asked it to reconsider the excise assessment in the correct perspective. The issue was the conditions and the circumstances that would attract the imposition of penalty under section 11AC of the Central Excise Act. In the two cases the tribunal had taken the view that penalty should not have been levied since the assessees had deposited the balance amount of excise duty (that was short paid at the first instance) even before the show cause notice was issued. On the other hand, the revenue authorities contended that mere non-payment or short payment of duty would inevitably lead to imposition of penalty equal to the amount by which duty was short paid. The Supreme Court stated that both views were wrong and required reconsideration.
HP government decision on hydro project tender upheld
The Supreme Court has upheld the Himachal Pradesh government's decision to cancel the allotment of the 261 MW Kuther hydroelectric project to DSC-Himal Company and award it to the second highest bidder, JSW Energy. While dismissing DSC-Himal Hydro JV's plea, the court upheld the state government's decision to allot the Kuther power project, Chamba, to JSW Energy.
FinMin to move SC for stay on HC order on commercial renting
The finance ministry will soon move the Supreme
Court against a high court order that said commercial renting of premises will not attract service tax. “We have decided to move the Supreme Court on the high court order. It will be done shortly,” sources in the Central Board of Excise and Customs (CBEC) said. The Delhi High Court had held that renting of immovable property for use in the course or furtherance of business could not be regarded as a service and, therefore, cannot be taxed.
Earlier, the high court had disposed of the petitions by retailers Lifestyle, Shoppers Stop, Home Solution and Barista Coffee on the ground that rent does not add value to the product being sold. Meanwhile, some analysts have said rent is in fact a value addition and is included in price of the product sold and should levy service tax. Service tax is a tax on value addition provided by some service providers and renting of immovable property for use in the course or furtherance of business did not involve any value addition and could not be regarded as a service, the high court had observed.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Read Business news in |  |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Advertisements |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Content Guide
