STATE OF CHHATTISGARH Vs. SOM DISTILLERY PVT. LTD.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard.

(2.) The Collector (Excise), Bilaspur passed an order dtd. 27/7/2005 imposing penalty of 3,19,903/- for loss caused during the course of transit of country-made liquor in sealed bottles from manufacturing warehouse situated in the Bilaspur supply zone to the storage warehouse, Bilaspur during the period from 1/4/2002 to 31/3/2004. The order of the Collector was challenged by respondent No.1 before the Excise Commissioner. The Excise Commissioner after hearing both the parties by order dtd. 17/8/2006 affirmed the order of the Collector (Excise). Feeling aggrieved against the order of the Collector (Excise) and the Excise Commissioner, respondent No.1 herein preferred an appeal before the Board of Revenue. The Board of Revenue after considering all the submissions on merits by order dtd. 23/9/2008 dismissed the appeal affirming the orders of the Collector (Excise) as well as the Excise Commissioner. Respondent No.1 did not challenge the order of the Board of Revenue before the higher forum, but preferred review petition before the Board of Revenue. The Board of Revenue by order dtd. 17/12/2008 has held that the Collector (Excise) has committed legal error in passing the combined order and did not give an opportunity of hearing separately to each of the cases and that has caused prejudice and set aside the order of the Collector (Excise) as well as the Excise Commissioner. Feeling aggrieved against the said order, the present writ petition has been filed.

(3.) Mr.P.K.Bhaduri, learned Government Advocate for the petitioners/State, would submit that scope of review is extremely limited and unless there is an error apparent on the face of record pointed out by a person for making the review application, the order under review cannot be set aside by the Board of Revenue exercising the limited jurisdiction of review.