Decided on December 07,2006



- (1.) THE applicant, a company registered under the Companies Act, 1956 has made the present application under Sub-section (1) of Section 15 of the Electricity Act, 2003 (the Act) for grant of licence for inter-State trading in electricity in whole of India for trading of volume 1000 Million Units or more of electricity in a year. THE notices in accordance with Sub-section (2) of Section 15 of the Act read with Clause (4) of Regulation 4 of the CERC (Procedure, Terms and Conditions for grant of Trading licence and other related matters) Regulations, 2004 were published. In response to the public notices, no objections were received. Trading in electricity is permitted under the main objects of the applicant.
(2.) As per Regulation 6, the net worth of the applicant at the time of filing of application should not be less than Rs. 20.00 crore in case of the applicant proposing to trade up to 1000 Million Units or more of electricity in a year. Based on the details furnished by the applicant, it was established that the applicant had the required net worth at the time of making of the application. Accordingly, the applicant prima facie qualified for grant of licence for inter-State trading in electricity as a category 'F' electricity trader. On the above considerations, the Commission by order dated 26.10.2006 proposed to grant licence to the applicant as category 'F' electricity trader subject to satisfactory outcome of the examination of details of cases directed to be filed the applicant in terms of para 8 of the said order dated 26.10.2006. A notice under Clause (a) of Sub-section (5) of Section 15 of the Act was published inviting suggestions or objections to the above proposal. No suggestions or objections have been received in response to the notice.
(3.) THE applicant has filed the details of cases involving Commissioner of Central Excise, Chennai, Labour Enforcement Officer, Rajamundry and the Secretary to the State of Tamil Nadu & CTO. THE details of these cases are discussed as under: (A) Commissioner of Central Excise, Chennai -II Vs GEA Energy System (India) Limited: According to the applicant, the Joint Commissioner of Central Excise pursuant to scrutiny of company's records raised charges to clearing goods without payment of duty in guise of replacement and removal of MODVAT inputs without payment of duty, issued an order dated 19.9.2001 against the applicant GEA and demanded: (i) the duty of Rs. 69141-/ and adjusted the said amount of Rs. 69141/-already paid; (ii) Ordered recovery of MODAVAT Credit to the extent of Rs. 165891-/; (iii) Imposed penalty of Rs. 69141-/ under Section 11AC/Rule 173Q and penalty of Rs. 165891-/ under Section 57 1(4); and (iv) Demanded interest for the above under Section 11AB and Rule 57 1(5). THE applicant has informed that it filed an appeal against the said order before the Commissioner, Central Excise (Appeals). THE Commissioner (Appeals) in his order dated 6.6.2002 confirmed the order of the Joint Commissioner and imposed the penalty of Rs. 69141 against the applicant. Against the said order dated 6.6.2002, the applicant further filed an appeal before the Customs, Excise and Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal and vide order dated 9.1.2003, the Tribunal has set aside the penalty and has held that the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) was not legally correct. THE Commissioner, Central Excise is stated to have referred the order of the Tribunal dated 9.1.2003 to the High Court of Madras for clarification and the matter is still pending before the High Court. (B) GEA Energy System (India) Limited Vs State of Tamil Nadu and Commercial Tax Officer, Ponneri: THE applicant, GEA Energy System (India) Limited has filed writ petition No. 10587 of 2006 before the High Court of Madras under Section 226 of the Constitution of India to issue an interim injunction restraining the Govt. of Tamil Nadu from levying or recovering entry tax on the goods under the provisions of Section 2(c) , Section 2(g) and Section 3 of the Tamil Nadu Tax on Entry of Goods into Local Areas Act, 2001. On 18.4.2006, High Court of Madras is said to have passed the following interim order: Until further orders, the petitioner is directed to pay the entry tax to the respondents, but the respondents will keep it in a separate interest bearing account till furthers order of the court Notice. (C) Labour Enforcement Officer Vs GEA Energy System (India) Limited : Labour Enforcement Officer (Central) is said to have filed a complaint under Section 22A of the Minimum Wages Act, 1948 for violation of Rules 22, 26(5), 26(1), 25(2), 21(4) and 26(2) of Minimum Wages (Central) Rules, 1950 before the Additional Judicial Magistrate Court. THEse complaints relates to non-display of notices showing minimum rates of wages, non-maintenance of register of muster roll, register of wages, register of overtime, etc. THE said case is said to be pending.;

Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.