SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1988 Supreme(SC) 457

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
SABYASACHI MUKHARJI AND S. RANGANATHAN, JJ.*
State of U.P. and others, Appellants
Versus
Renusagar Power Co. and others, Respondents.
Civil Appeal No. 2966 of 1986, D/- 28-7-1988.
Advocates appeared
Mr. R. N. Trivedi, Addl. Advocate General, Mr. Gopal Subramaniam and Mrs. Shobha Dikshit, Advocates with him for Appellants; Mr. B. Sen, Mr. D. P. Gupta, Mr. Palkhiwala and Mr. Raja Ram Aggarwal, Sr. Advocate, Mr. N. R. Khaitan, Mr. E.D.Desai, Mr. Y. K. Khaitan, Mr. Jijina, Mr. Sandeep Aggarwal and Mr. T. N. Sen, Advocates with them for Respondents.

Advocates:
B.SEN, D.P.GUPTA, E.D.DESAI, GOPAL SUBRAMANIUM, JILANI, N.R.Khaitan, PALKHIWALA, R.N.TRIVEDI, RAJA RAM AGARWAL, SANDIP AGARWAL, SHOBHA DIXIT, T.N.SENAPATI, Y.K.KHAITAN

Headnote:FIXATION OF DIFFERENT ELECTRICITY RATES FOR DIFFERENT CLASSES OF PERSONS OR GRANT OF EXEMPTION -HELD PUBLIC INTEREST IS PARAMOUNT FACTOR TO BE TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION - QUASI-JUDICIAL OR ADMINISTRATIVE ACTS - FIXATION OF DIFFERENT ELECTRICITY RATES FOR DIFFERENT CLASSES OF CONSUMERS—POWER TO BE EXERCISED BY GOVERNMENT IN PUBLIC INTEREST DOES NOT AMOUNT TO EXCESSIVE DELEGATION - LIFTING OF CORPORATE VEIL—PERMISSIBILITY

       -that in the expanding of horizon of modern jurisprudence, lifting of corporate veil is permissible. Its frontiers are unlimited. It must, however, depend primarily on the realities of the situation. The aim of legislation is to do justice to all the parties. The horizon of the doctrine of lifting of corporate veil is expanding. Broadly and generally speaking the, corporate veil may be lifted where a statute itself contemplates lifting the veil, or fraud or improper conduct is intended to be prevented, or a taxing statute or a beneficent statute is sought to be evaded or where associated companies are inextricably connected as to be, in reality, part of one concern. It is neither necessary nor desirable to enumerate the classes of cases where lifting the veil is permissible, since, that must necessarily depend on the relevant statutory or other provisions, the object sought to be achieved, the impugned conduct, the involvement of the element of the public interest, the effect on parties who may be effected etc.

Judgment

SABYASACHI MUKHARJI, J.:- This appeal by special leave is directed against the judgment and order of the High Court of Allahabad dated 26th September, 1984 : (reported in 1985 All LJ 250). The first appellant is the State of Uttar Pradesh impleaded through the Chief Secretary to the Government of Uttar Pradesh, Lucknow. The second appellant is the Secretary to the Government of Uttar Pradesh, Department of Energy, Lucknow. The third appellant is one Shri Yogendra Narain, presently acting as Secretary to the Chief Minister, State of Uttar Pradesh, Lucknow. At a particular point of time Shri Yogendra Narain was the Secretary to the Department of Energy. The fourth appellant is the Assistant Electrical Inspector, a functionary under the U.P. Electricity (Duty) Act, 1952, Mirzapur Zone, Rani Patti, Mirzapur. The fifth appellant is the Collector of Mirzapur.

2. There are four respondents in this appeal. The first respondent is Renusagar Power Company Ltd. The second respondent is M/s. Hindustan Aluminium Corporation Ltd. Respondent No. 3 is Shri D. M. Mimatramka who resides at Hindalco Administrative Colony, Renukut, Mirzapur. The fourth respondent is Shri Rajendra Kumar Kasliwal who resides at Hindustan Aluminium Corporation Ltd., Renukut, District Mirzapur. Respondents 3 and 4 mentioned above are the shareholders of the first respondent and the second respondent, that is, Renusagar Power Company and M/s. Hindustan Aluminium Corporation Ltd. respectively. It is stated that M/s. Hindustan Aluminium Corporation Ltd., established an aluminium factory at Renukut in Mirzapur District, U.P. in 1959. It is the case of the respondents that it was induced to do so on the assurance that cheap electricity and power would be made available at the relevant time. In 1962, a plant of Hindustan Aluminium Corporation Ltd. for manufacture of aluminium was commissioned. M/s. Renusagar Power Co. Ltd. a wholly owned subsidiary of M/s. Hindustan Aluminium Corporation Ltd. was incorporated in 1964. M/s. Renusagar Power Company Ltd. was incorporated separately and had its own separate Memorandum and Articles of Association. On 9th September, 1967, the first generating unit of 67.5 MW in Renusagar was commissioned by M/s. Renusagar Power Company Ltd. The second generating unit of the Company was commissioned on the 5th October, 1968. The U.P. Electricity (Duty) Act, 1952 (hereinafter called the Act) came into force from 15th January, 1953 and it sought to levy a duty on the consumption of electrical energy in the State of Uttar Pradesh.

3. In the Statement of Objects and Reasons, which was published in U.P. Gazette, it was stated that the programmes of development of the State involved enormous expenditure and thus additional resources had to be raised, the bulk of which could only be raised by means of fresh taxation. It was stated that the object of the Bill, inter alia, provided as follows :

"A tax on the consumption of electrical energy will impose a negligible burden on the consumer and is a fruitful source of additional revenue. The Bill has been so prepared as to ensure that the tax payable by a person will be related to the quantity of electricity consumed by him. The Bill is being introduced with the above object."

4. By virtue of the provisions of the U.P. Electricity (Duty) (Amendment) Ordinance, 1959 various amendments were carried out in the said Act. In section 2 of the principal Act, a new clause, clause (hh) describing a scheduled industry was inserted. By virtue of the aforesaid newly inserted clause, the expression scheduled industry meant any of the industries specified in the schedule. In the proviso to Section 3 of the principal Act, after clause (d), a new clause (e) was inserted which provided for non-levy or exemption from the payment of electricity duty on the energy consumed by a consumer in a scheduled industry. The expression which was added was "by a consumer in a scheduled industry". By virtue of Section 8 of the Amending























































































































































































Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top