sejal architectural glass limited - Securities and Exchange Board of ...

een left out only due to clerical error, and that the relevant amount had been deducted as shown in
the said monthly statement. Our Company had also filed a Certificate obtained from our statutory
Auditors, S.S. Puranik And Co. dated March 27, 2003, confirming that the consignment was duly
insured under the aforesaid insurance policy.
The present complaint has been filed by our Company claiming an amount of Rs. 11,42,812/- on
account of net estimated loss, survey fee and other miscellaneous expenses. UIICL has submitted that
the complaint should not be determined by the Consumer Redressal Forum but only by a Civil Court,
as our Company is not a ‘consumer’ and that the dispute involved complicated questions of facts and
examination of voluminous evidence which cannot be determined in summary proceedings. Further,
UIICL has claimed that is not liable to compensate our Company as the consignment appears as
cancelled in the monthly statement.
The complaint is listed for arguments at the Consumer Redressal Forum, Mumbai on November 30,
2007.
Litigation against our Company
2. Survey under the provisions of the section 133 (A) of Income Tax Act, 1961.
The Income Tax Department carried out survey under the Income Tax Act, 1961, against our Company
and our Group entities, namely, Sejal Glass House, Mitesh Textiles, Sejal International Limited, Sejal
Glass Craft Private Limited, Sejal Insurance Broking Limited, Sejal Float Glass Limited and Sejal
Finance Limited on August 22, 2007. Mr. Amrut S. Gada has vide his letter dated November 14, 2007,
declared an additional income of Rs. 5, 00,00,000 of which the tax liability on Rs. 4,00,00,000 is
payable by Mr. Amrut S. Gada and the tax liability on balance Rs. 1,00,00,000 is to be paid by some
of our Group concerns namely; Sejal Glass House, Mitesh Textiles, Sejal International Limited, Sejal
Glass Craft Private Limited. Further, Mr. Amrut S. Gada vide his letter dated October 30, 2007, has
confirmed and declared to our company that he in his individual capacity is liable to pay the tax on
the additional income of 4,00, 00,000 and that there will ne no liability on our Company towards the
above mentioned declaration. The said tax liability will be paid by the parties in the current financial
year based on advance tax principles.
3. Notice from the Electricity Department, Dadra and Nagar Haveli, Silvassa
Our Company has received a notice dated April 23, 2007, from the Electricity Department, Dadra and
Nagar Haveli, Silvassa, in respect of the inadequate distance maintained between the industrial shed
at our factory premises at Silvassa, from two high voltage electricity cables of 66 Kilo Volts and 11
Kilo Volts (KV) respectively, passing over our factory premises at Silvassa. The tower in respect of the
said high voltage electricity cables is situated in our factory premises.
The Electricity Department, by its letter dated April 24, 2004, has granted its approval to our
Company, to shift the tower which supports the two high voltage wires at the costs of our Company.
Our Company, by its letter dated November 10, 2007, appointed M/s M.M. Thangam for erecting an
additional tower. The Company has paid advance of an amount of Rs. 2,44,850/- on the total amount
of Rs.14,50,000/- to the said M/s M.M. Thangam. The work of shifting the said tower is expected to
start in December, 2007.
II. Cases filed by and against our Directors
Cases filed by our Directors
4. Complaint no. 635 of 1998, Mrs. Padma Subramanian and Mr. R. Subramanian and others
(“Complainants”) versus Prudential Capital Markets Limited (“Opposite Party”) in the
District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Mumbai
208