• Investment World
• eWorld
• Brand Line
• Mentor
• Life
• Brand Quest
• The New Manager
• BL Club
• Smartbuy

Stocks

• Quotes
• SE Diary
• Scoreboard
• Open-End Mutual Fund

Cross Currency

• Rates
  
  

Shipping

• Ports
  
  

Archives

• Yesterday
• Datewise
• Resources
• In Focus
• In Depth
• Events 2007

Group Sites

• The Hindu
• The Hindu ePaper
• Business Line
• Business Line ePaper
• Sportstar
• Frontline
• The Hindu eBooks
• The Hindu Images

Our Legal Correspondent

Chennai, Nov. 12 The Madras High Court has upheld the order of Commissioner, Prohibition & Excise, TN, asking Vorion Chemicals & Distilleries Ltd, Chennai, to pay duty of Rs 3,00,124 being excess wastage of 6,821.388 proof litres of rectified spirit during the process of curing in wooden vats in March, 1974.

Dismissing the writ petition of the company challenging the order dated 22-10-1997 of State Govt [vide GO (2D) No 63, Prohibition & Excise Dept] and confirming the order of Commissioner for Prohibition & Excise dated 21-9-1995, Mr Justice K. Chandru ruled that when pursuant to direction of this Court, Commissioner had issued show-cause notice to the petitioner and also considered the explanation offered by company, it was not open to this Court to interfere with the satisfaction arrived at by a statutory authority.

Rule 24 of TN Distillery Rules framed under the TN Prohibition Act, 1937 clearly talked about the satisfaction of the Commissioner with reference to the loss, the Judge noted.

By a communication dated 11-4-1973, R-2 permitted the petitioner to use stock of 29,573 litres of rectified spirit for curing in the distillery subject to the condition that the loss of spirit due to absorption by the wooden vats during storage should be borne by them. The Government directed the Board of Revenue to initiate action against the petitioner for recovery of the excess duty being the amount to be levied at the tariff rate of Rs 44 per proof litre for the entire quantity of rectified spirit stated to have been lost.

According to the petitioner, the State Government was not the appellate authority in dealing with the issue. R-2 was carried away by the earlier GO Ms No 2392 of 22-9-1979, and there was no independent application of mind. Earlier, the company’s application was accepted by the then Commissioner, and the present incumbent could not take a different view.

The Judge said that Rule 24 made it clear that it was only when the Commissioner was satisfied about the explanation offered by the distiller; the question of any waiver of the dues would arise. Hence, there was no case made out for interfering with the impugned order. Hence, the writ petition stood dismissed.

More Stories on : Courts/Legal Issues | Excise and Customs | Tamil Nadu | Breweries

Article E-Mail :: Comment :: Syndication :: Printer Friendly Page

Copyright © 2008, The Hindu Business Line. Republication or redissemination of the contents of this screen are expressly prohibited without the written consent of The Hindu Business Line