Tribunals and CommissionsFull Bench(2023) 10 NCLAT CK 0011

Haldia Precision Engineering Pvt. Ltd vs Competition Commission of India

National Company Law Appellate Tribunal · Decided on 6 October 2023

HON’BLE JUDGES
Ashok Bhushan, Chairperson · Barun Mitra, Member (T) · Arun Baroka, Member (T)
RESULT
Disposed Of
CASE NUMBER
I.A. No. 4538 Of 2023 In Competition Appeal No. 24 Of 2012

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

7 paragraphs · 291 words
1.

I.A No.4538 of 2023:- This is an Application filed by the Appellant praying for following reliefs:-

“A. Allow the present application and to refund the amount of Rs.20,49,225.00 (Rupees Twenty Lakh Forty Nine Thousand Two Hundred Twenty Five Only) deposited vide the Demand Draft 903612 dated 30.10.2012 drawn on CITIBANK N.A. in favour of the ‘Pay and Accounts Officer, Ministry of Corporate Affairs, New Delhi’.

B. To pass such or other further orders as this Hon’ble Tribunal may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case and thus render justice.”

2.

The present Appeal was filed by the Appellant challenging the order of the Competition Appellate Tribunal dated 20.12.2013. The Competition Commission of India has imposed penalty on the Appellant which was under challenge. Along with the Appeal, Appellant has also deposit 10% of the penalty by way of Demand Draft in the name of ‘Pay and Accounts Officer, Ministry of Corporate Affairs, New Delhi’ of Rs.20,49,225/-.

3.

Learned Counsel for the Appellant submits that the orders passed by the Competition Appellate Tribunal were challenged before the Hon’ble Supreme  Court  and  in  batch  of  matters-  “Rajasthan  Cylinders  and Containers Limited vs. Union of India and Anr- (2020) 16 SCC 615”, Appeals were allowed and orders imposing penalty were set aside.

4.

Learned Counsel for the Appellant submits that in view of the setting aside of the order of penalty, Appellant is entitled to refund the amount which was submitted by Demand Draft No. 903612 dated 30.10.2012.

5.

In view of the facts of the present case, Appellant has made out a case for issuing a direction to refund the Demand Draft dated 30.10.2012. Let the Demand Draft be returned to the Appellant. IA is disposed of.