Orissa HC order 'indefensible'

LEGAL DIGEST

The Sureme Court observed last week that the Orissa High Court order restraining the Orissa Electricity Regulatory Commission from taking steps for setting tariffs for 2002-03 and 2003-04 was "indefensible".

Though the high court had later modified the order and permitted the commission to set tariffs, it had kept matters pending for the purpose of "monitoring". The Supreme Court observed that these orders were "rather strange".

But the Supreme Court did not interfere further with the high court order as the commission had set the tariffs following the amended order of the high court. It directed the high court to treat the matter as closed.

No exemption for PCO memory chip

The Supreme Court last week ruled that programmed memory chips were an integral part of the STD-PCO unit and were not entitled to any special exemption under a 1989 central excise notification.

The court expressed this view in the Anjaleem Enterprises Pvt Ltd vs Commissioner of Central Excise case, while dismissing the appeal of the company, which manufactures computerised STD-PCO units.

In the tax returns, the company claimed exemption asserting that the chips were "recorded medium". The authorities insisted that the chips were integral part of the STD-PCO units and were not eligible for exemption. The Supreme Court agreed with this view and dismissed the appeal.

Modvat, Cenvat not different

A three-judge Bench of the Supreme Court, in the judgment, in the Vikram Cement vs Commissioner of Central Excise case, last week held that Modvat and Cenvat framed under the Central Excise Tariff Act were not different and an earlier decision of the court holding a contradictory view was not correct.

Last year, a two-judge Bench of the court, in the Commissioner of Central Excise vs JK Udaipur Udyog Ltd case, had declared that the two schemes were different. However, this view was doubted in another case and was referred to a larger Bench.

Patna HC told to review order

In the long-standing dispute between the management of Sudamdih Colliery of Bharat Coking Coal Ltd and Rashtriya Colliery Mazdoor Sangh, the Supreme Court has asked the Patna High Court to reconsider its earlier order to take back a group of workers with 75 per cent back wages.

The high court had held that the workers belonged to the colliery, but the management denied it.

The central industrial tribunal declared them to be employees. The high court confirmed this view. The management appealed to the Supreme Court. It found that the high court had not taken into account the principles laid down by it in the Steel Authority of India case of 2001. Therefore, it asked the high court to apply those principles in the colliery case.