2018 (11) TMI 94

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... An Interlocutory Application has been filed by the Appellants for rectification/modification of the interest amount, if any, payable by the Appellants on the penalty imposed by the Respondent- 'Competition Commission of India' (for short "Commission") under Section 43A of the Competition Act, 2002 vide its order dated 10th February, 2015. 2. The brief fact of the case is that the Commission by order dated 10th February, 2015 imposed penalty of Rs. 2,00,00,000/- (Rupees Two Crores) on the Appellants under Section 43A. Thereafter, in terms of Regulation 3 of the 'Manner of Recovery of Monetary Penalty Regulations, 2011', the Commission issued a demand notice providing thirty days' time to deposit the penalty amount. 3. In the meantim....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ing been deposited with the COMPAT and later on total amount of Rs. 2,00,00,000/- (Rupees Two Crores) having been deposited with the COMPAT, the Appellants are not liable to pay any interest. Such submission has been disputed by the learned counsel for the Commission. 7. Similar issue fell for consideration before the Hon'ble Supreme Court in "State of Rajasthan and Anr. Vs. J.K. Synthetics Limited and Anr. ─ (2011) 12 SCC 518", wherein the Hon'ble Apex Court held as follows: "18. Before us, one of the contentions urged to resist the claim of the State for increase in the rate of interest, is with reference to the fundamental question about the liability itself. It was submitted that they were not liable to pay interest on....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nt of the orders of the court and for no fault of its. It succeeds in the writ petition and yet loses. The consumer files the writ petition, obtains stay of operation of the Notification revising the rates and fails in his attack upon the validity of the Notification and yet he is relieved of the obligation to pay the late payment surcharge for the period of stay, which he is liable to pay according to the statutory terms and conditions of supply - which terms and conditions indeed form part of the contract of supply entered into by him with the Board. We do not think that any such unfair and inequitable proposition can be sustained in law....... (emphasis supplied) It is equally well settled that an order of stay granted pending disposal o....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....                                         xxx                                                                   xxx 23. It is therefore evident that whenever there is an interim order of stay in regard to any revision in r....