{"id":45705,"date":"2000-01-18T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2000-01-17T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/hyderabad-industries-ltd-vs-union-of-india-ors-on-18-january-2000"},"modified":"2018-02-04T03:51:43","modified_gmt":"2018-02-03T22:21:43","slug":"hyderabad-industries-ltd-vs-union-of-india-ors-on-18-january-2000","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/hyderabad-industries-ltd-vs-union-of-india-ors-on-18-january-2000","title":{"rendered":"Hyderabad Industries Ltd vs Union Of India &amp; Ors on 18 January, 2000"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Supreme Court of India<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Hyderabad Industries Ltd vs Union Of India &amp; Ors on 18 January, 2000<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_author\">Author: S Hegde<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_bench\">Bench: N.Santosh Hegde, R.C.Lahot, S.P.Bharucha.<\/div>\n<pre>           PETITIONER:\nHYDERABAD INDUSTRIES LTD.\n\n\tVs.\n\nRESPONDENT:\nUNION OF INDIA &amp; ORS.\n\nDATE OF JUDGMENT:\t18\/01\/2000\n\nBENCH:\nN.Santosh Hegde, R.C.Lahot, S.P.Bharucha.\n\n\n\n\nJUDGMENT:\n<\/pre>\n<p>      SANTOSH HEGDE, J.\n<\/p>\n<p>      The only question that arises for our consideration in<br \/>\nthese  appeals\tis  whether the service charges\t payable  to<br \/>\nMinerals  and  Metals  Trading Corporation (for\t short\tthe<br \/>\nMMTC)  by the appellant for the importation of raw asbestos<br \/>\nmade  by  them,\t is includible in the  assessable  value  of<br \/>\nimport\tas provided in the Customs Act and Customs Valuation<br \/>\n(Determination\tof Price) Rules, 1988 or not.  The appellant<br \/>\nis  a manufacturer of asbestos cement products for which  it<br \/>\nuses  raw  asbestos  which is mainly imported  from  foreign<br \/>\ncountries.   Under  the provisions of the Import and  Export<br \/>\nPolicy of the Government of India, the MMTC is designated as<br \/>\na  canalising agent for the said purpose.  The MMTC  imports<br \/>\nthe  raw  asbestos  in\tbulk purchasing the  same  from\t the<br \/>\nforeign sellers.  It then enters into sale agreement on what<br \/>\nis  known as high seas sales basis with the various users of<br \/>\nraw  asbestos.\tConsideration paid by the purchasers of\t the<br \/>\nraw  asbestos  from the MMTC (which includes the  appellant)<br \/>\nincludes  apart from the purchase value incurred by the MMTC<br \/>\nan  additional\tsum equivalent to 3.5 per cent of the C &amp;  F<br \/>\nvalue  of  the imports as service charges.  On\tapplications<br \/>\nbeing  made for refund based on a claim that service charges<br \/>\ncollected by the MMTC cannot be subjected to levy of customs<br \/>\nduty,  the appellant, who suffered adverse orders before all<br \/>\nthe authorities below including the Customs, Excise and Gold<br \/>\n(Control)  Appellate  Tribunal, has preferred these  appeals<br \/>\nbefore\tus.   The  argument of the appellant is\t that  these<br \/>\nservice\t charges  do not constitute part of the\t transaction<br \/>\nvalue,\thence  are not liable to be added to the  assessable<br \/>\nvalue  because the transaction between the appellant and the<br \/>\nMMTC  is analogous to that of an agency transaction,  though<br \/>\nin  fact there is no agreement of agency.  It is also argued<br \/>\nbefore\tus that the service charges levied by the MMTC is in<br \/>\nthe nature of buying commission which commission according<br \/>\nto  the appellant is not includible in the assessable  value<br \/>\nin  view of the exclusion provided in Rule 9(1)(a)(i) of the<br \/>\nValuation Rules.\n<\/p>\n<p>      On  behalf  of the respondents, it is  contended\tthat<br \/>\nthere  is  no relationship of a principal and  an  agent<br \/>\nbetween\t the  appellant\t and the MMTC and that\tthe  service<br \/>\ncharges\t collected by the latter cannot be equated with\t the<br \/>\ncommission  that  is payable to an agent.  The stand of\t the<br \/>\nrespondent  Union further is that these goods of which\tMMTC<br \/>\nwas the owner were sold to the appellant on a high seas sale<br \/>\nbasis  for consideration which included apart from the\tcost<br \/>\npaid  by the MMTC to its foreign seller the service  charges<br \/>\npayable to it.\n<\/p>\n<p>      The  undisputed facts which are to be noticed for\t the<br \/>\npurpose\t of  disposal of these appeals are as follows :\t  To<br \/>\ncater  to  the needs of the users of raw asbestos, the\tMMTC<br \/>\ncalls  for  global  tender  and\t after\tidentifying  foreign<br \/>\nsupplier it purchases the raw asbestos in bulk which is sold<br \/>\nin  high  seas\tsales to various users of raw  asbestos\t for<br \/>\nwhich  the  MMTC charges apart from the\t sale  consideration<br \/>\npaid by it to the foreign buyer an additional sum as service<br \/>\ncharges.    It\tis  an\tadmitted   fact\t that  there  is  no<br \/>\nrelationship  of  a  principal\tand  an\t agent\tbetween\t the<br \/>\npurchaser  like\t the  appellant\t and  the  MMTC.   The\tMMTC<br \/>\nadmittedly  does not buy the raw asbestos for and on  behalf<br \/>\nof any particular consumer of raw asbestos in India.  On the<br \/>\ncontrary,  it  makes a bulk purchase to cater the  needs  of<br \/>\nvarious\t consumers  of the raw asbestos in India and  it  is<br \/>\nonly  after  the  goods are sold on the basis of  high\tseas<br \/>\nsales,\tthe goods become the property of the purchasers like<br \/>\nthe appellant.\n<\/p>\n<p>      The  argument  of\t agency is obviously  put  forth  to<br \/>\ninvoke\t the  benefit  of   exemption  granted\tto   buying<br \/>\ncommission  under  Rule 9(1)(a)(i) of the  Valuation  Rules<br \/>\nreferred  to  above.  This rule excludes the amount paid  as<br \/>\nbuying\tcommission from the cost and services which is\tto<br \/>\nbe  included  in  determining  the  transaction\t value.\t  To<br \/>\nattract\t this  exclusion, the appellant seeks to  rely\tupon<br \/>\nInterpretative\tNote  to Rule 9 which reads thus :  In\tRule<br \/>\n9(1)(a)(i), the terms buying commission means fees paid by<br \/>\nan importer to his agent for the service of representing him<br \/>\nabroad\tin  the\t purchase of the goods being  valued.\tThe<br \/>\nappellant  wants  this\tCourt  to  firstly  equate  service<br \/>\ncommission  to\tbuying commission, then on this basis  to<br \/>\ntreat  MMTC as an agent.  It is not possible to accept\tthis<br \/>\nargument  of  the  appellant for more than one\treason.\t  As<br \/>\nalready\t noticed, there is no relationship of principal\t and<br \/>\nagent  between\tthe appellant and the MMTC nor is there\t any<br \/>\nagreement between the parties to pay buying commission nor<br \/>\nhas  the  MMTC\tagreed with the appellant  to  represent  it<br \/>\nabroad in the purchase of raw asbestos.\t Material on record,<br \/>\non the contrary, shows that the MMTC on its own goes through<br \/>\nthe process of identifying the foreign supplier from whom it<br \/>\npurchases  the\tgoods  in  question   on  its  own   without<br \/>\nrepresenting  any  particular buyer in India and  sells\t the<br \/>\nsame to the purchaser on high seas sales basis to the Indian<br \/>\nbuyers\tlike  the  appellant.\tPurchase by  MMTC  from\t the<br \/>\nforeign\t seller\t and  subsequent sale by it  to\t the  Indian<br \/>\nbuyers\tare independent of each other.\tTherefore, MMTC when<br \/>\nit  includes  service charges in its sale consideration,  it<br \/>\ndoes   not   include  the   same  as  buying   commission.<br \/>\nTherefore, this contention of the appellant is rejected.  It<br \/>\nis  lastly contended on behalf of the appellant that by\t the<br \/>\ninclusion  of service charges in the assessable value of the<br \/>\nimported goods, the Customs Authorities have imposed a heavy<br \/>\nand  unreasonable burden on them.  We are not impressed with<br \/>\nthis argument either.  Assuming the burden of duty is heavy,<br \/>\nthis  Court has held that the same cannot be avoided on that<br \/>\nground.\t  That\tapart,\tit  must  be  noticed  that  if\t the<br \/>\nappellant  had\tbeen permitted to import  independently,  it<br \/>\nwould  have  incurred substantial expenses in identifying  a<br \/>\nforeign\t supplier and negotiating the terms of the sale with<br \/>\nthe  said supplier.  Further, we should also take notice  of<br \/>\nthe  fact by virtue of the high seas sales through which the<br \/>\nappellant  purchased the raw asbestos from the MMTC, it\t has<br \/>\nderived\t the benefit of avoiding the payment of sales tax on<br \/>\nthese  goods.\tThese  facts are sufficient  to\t reject\t the<br \/>\ncontention  of\tthe  appellant\traised\t on  the  basis\t  of<br \/>\nunreasonableness  of the levy.\tFor the above reasons, these<br \/>\nappeals fail and are dismissed with costs.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Supreme Court of India Hyderabad Industries Ltd vs Union Of India &amp; Ors on 18 January, 2000 Author: S Hegde Bench: N.Santosh Hegde, R.C.Lahot, S.P.Bharucha. PETITIONER: HYDERABAD INDUSTRIES LTD. Vs. RESPONDENT: UNION OF INDIA &amp; ORS. DATE OF JUDGMENT: 18\/01\/2000 BENCH: N.Santosh Hegde, R.C.Lahot, S.P.Bharucha. JUDGMENT: SANTOSH HEGDE, J. The only question that arises for [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[30],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-45705","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-supreme-court-of-india"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.3 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Hyderabad Industries Ltd vs Union Of India &amp; Ors on 18 January, 2000 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/hyderabad-industries-ltd-vs-union-of-india-ors-on-18-january-2000\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Hyderabad Industries Ltd vs Union Of India &amp; Ors on 18 January, 2000 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/hyderabad-industries-ltd-vs-union-of-india-ors-on-18-january-2000\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2000-01-17T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-02-03T22:21:43+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"6 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/hyderabad-industries-ltd-vs-union-of-india-ors-on-18-january-2000#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/hyderabad-industries-ltd-vs-union-of-india-ors-on-18-january-2000\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Hyderabad Industries Ltd vs Union Of India &amp; Ors on 18 January, 2000\",\"datePublished\":\"2000-01-17T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-02-03T22:21:43+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/hyderabad-industries-ltd-vs-union-of-india-ors-on-18-january-2000\"},\"wordCount\":1135,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Supreme Court of India\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/hyderabad-industries-ltd-vs-union-of-india-ors-on-18-january-2000#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/hyderabad-industries-ltd-vs-union-of-india-ors-on-18-january-2000\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/hyderabad-industries-ltd-vs-union-of-india-ors-on-18-january-2000\",\"name\":\"Hyderabad Industries Ltd vs Union Of India &amp; Ors on 18 January, 2000 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2000-01-17T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-02-03T22:21:43+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/hyderabad-industries-ltd-vs-union-of-india-ors-on-18-january-2000#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/hyderabad-industries-ltd-vs-union-of-india-ors-on-18-january-2000\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/hyderabad-industries-ltd-vs-union-of-india-ors-on-18-january-2000#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Hyderabad Industries Ltd vs Union Of India &amp; Ors on 18 January, 2000\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Hyderabad Industries Ltd vs Union Of India &amp; Ors on 18 January, 2000 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/hyderabad-industries-ltd-vs-union-of-india-ors-on-18-january-2000","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Hyderabad Industries Ltd vs Union Of India &amp; Ors on 18 January, 2000 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/hyderabad-industries-ltd-vs-union-of-india-ors-on-18-january-2000","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2000-01-17T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-02-03T22:21:43+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"6 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/hyderabad-industries-ltd-vs-union-of-india-ors-on-18-january-2000#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/hyderabad-industries-ltd-vs-union-of-india-ors-on-18-january-2000"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Hyderabad Industries Ltd vs Union Of India &amp; Ors on 18 January, 2000","datePublished":"2000-01-17T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-02-03T22:21:43+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/hyderabad-industries-ltd-vs-union-of-india-ors-on-18-january-2000"},"wordCount":1135,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Supreme Court of India"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/hyderabad-industries-ltd-vs-union-of-india-ors-on-18-january-2000#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/hyderabad-industries-ltd-vs-union-of-india-ors-on-18-january-2000","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/hyderabad-industries-ltd-vs-union-of-india-ors-on-18-january-2000","name":"Hyderabad Industries Ltd vs Union Of India &amp; Ors on 18 January, 2000 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2000-01-17T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-02-03T22:21:43+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/hyderabad-industries-ltd-vs-union-of-india-ors-on-18-january-2000#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/hyderabad-industries-ltd-vs-union-of-india-ors-on-18-january-2000"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/hyderabad-industries-ltd-vs-union-of-india-ors-on-18-january-2000#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Hyderabad Industries Ltd vs Union Of India &amp; Ors on 18 January, 2000"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/45705","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=45705"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/45705\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=45705"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=45705"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=45705"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}