UNION OF INDIA Vs. PUNJAB SUGAR MILLS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal filed by the Union of India, on a certificate granted by the High court under Article 133 (1 (A) of the Constitution on the ground that the amount in dispute at the time of filing of the writ petition and even at the time when the lease was granted was more than Rs. 20,000. 00. We are referring to this certificate obviously for the reason that no question of law much less a substantial question of law arises in this appeal. The distribution of sugar is controlled by the U. P. Sugar and Gur Manufacturers (sic) Licensing Orders, 1962 and the other orders made under the Essential Commodities Act. In the matter of levy of excise duty, the sale sugar is divided into two classes, namely, levy sugar and free sale sugar. In regard to the levy sugar the excise duty payable was 25 per cent whereas in the case of tree sale sugar it was 37 1/2 per cent. The levy sugar should be supplied by the manufacturer to the persons nominated by the District Magistrate concerned and the manufacturer has no right to sell the same to any other person. What happened was the District Magistrate did not appoint any nominee to purchase the levy sugar and in some cases though he has nominated the nominees did not lift the sugar. In those circumstances, when the manufacturer asked for instructions, the State government directed that since the nominees of the District Magistrate had refused to lift, the manufacturers areauthorised to sell to any other authorised dealer of their own choice "at a price not more than levy price". The respondent-manufacturers sold the sugar at the levy prices and, therefore, they contended that they are liable to pay only 25 per cent excise duty. Obviously, this contention of the manufacturer was right and that was accepted by the High court. The writ petition filed by the manufacturers questioning the demand at 37 1/2 per cent excise duty was accordingly quashed (sic allowed) and the appellant herein was directed not to levy and collect from the respondents the duty of excise and the additional or excise in excess of the rates mentioned in the notification of the central government dated March I, 1970 relating to the levy sugar. In the circumstances, there are no grounds to interfere. The appeal is accordingly dismissed. However, there will be no order as to costs.