RAIPUR BOTTLING COMPANYBHATIA Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Impugning legality, validity and correctness of the order dated 4.4.2016 (Annexure P/1) passed by the Board of Revenue partly affirming and partly setting aside the order of the Collector of Stamps, this writ petition under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India has been filed by the petitioners herein.

(2.) The Essential facts requisite to judge the correctness of the plea raised at the Bar are as under:-

(3.) Mr.Ashish Surana, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, would submit that instrument i.e. partnership deed dated 15.11.2013 was never produced before the District Excise Officer in terms of Section 33 (1) of the Act of 1899 and the District Excise Officer is not empowered to take evidence and unless two conditions precedent are fulfilled, no order for impounding could have been made by learned Collector of Stamps and as such, the order of the Collector of Stamps partly upheld by the Chief Controlling Revenue Authority is liable to be set aside.