Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 74 (0.69 seconds)
Documents citing M/S Voltas Limited, Bombay vs Union Of India & Ors on 7 February, 1995

Sharda Synthetics Ltd. And Hindustan ... vs Cce, Mumbai-Iii And Cce, Chandigarh on 18 June, 2003

8. We also do not find any force in the submissions of the learned SDR that the amount pre-deposited would be returnable only when the Final Order is passed and not in a case where only the matter has been remanded for re-adjudication. The Delhi High Court has considered this aspect in Voltas Ltd. v. UOI, 1999 (65) ECC 879 (Del) : 1999 (12) ELT 34 (DEL). In this case the Petitioners deposited Rs. 50 lakhs on 27.5.97 as per direction of the Tribunal. The appeal was finally decided on 4.3.98 and Tribunal remanded the matter to the adjudicating authority for deciding the issue afresh in the light of the. technical literature made available by the Petitioner. The Delhi High Court has held as under:
Customs, Excise and Gold Tribunal - Delhi Cites 13 - Cited by 31 - Full Document

Alkali Manufacturers Association Of ... vs American Natural Soda Ash Corporation ... on 10 June, 1997

The Supreme Court's decision and observations in Voltas Ltd. v. Union of India [1995] 83 Comp Cas 228 ; AIR 1995 SC 1881, are directly related to only restrictive trade practices falling under Section 33(1) of the Act. As in the instant case, the charges have a larger sweep covering restrictive trade practices falling under Section 2(o) of the Act besides unfair and monopolistic trade practices, the said judgment of the Supreme Court is not directly applicable. What was emphasised by the Supreme Court was that in respect of agreements falling under Section 33(1) of the Act, the Commission needs to examine in depth, the question whether the objectionable clauses in the agreements constituting restrictive trade practices falling under Section 33(1) of the Act are prejudicial to public interest. In other words, the Supreme Court has mandated the Commission to adjudicate on the issue of public interest to allow or not allow the gateways after giving an opportunity for evidence to be let in by the charged party.
Monopolies and Restrictive Trade Practices Commission Cites 20 - Cited by 1 - Full Document
1   2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next