MOHAN MEAKIN BREWERIES LTD Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE cases are being disposed of by a common judgement as they raise a common question of law, and the essential facts are the same. For the purposes of deciding controversy that has arisen between the parties, it will be sufficient to state the facts in Writ Petition No. 2603 of 1973.

(2.) THE petitioner, a Limited Company holds a licence in Form P.D. 1 for the manufacture of Indian made foreign liquor. THE petitioner also holds licence in Form F. L. 3-A for bottling of Rum. Rum, that is bottled by the petitioner, is supplied to Military Troops exclusively. THE process for bottling consists of transferring liquor from vats, which are in a bonded warehouse to bottles in another bonded warehouse, under the supervision of the Excise Department. THE Excise Department imposed excise duty on the quantity of Rum manufactured by it, on the basis that the assessee became liable to pay excise duty as soon as it manufactured rum, and wastage in the bottling process could not be taken into account for fixing excise duty. THE petitioner's representation and revision against this levy have been turned down, and hence the present petition.

(3.) IT is, thus, clear that the impugned levy cannot be sustained in all these petitions. In Special Appeal No. 79 of 1978 the matter has been remanded to the Excise Commissioner for considering the claim of the petitioner for being exonerated from payment of excise duty. However, on the view taken by us that excise duty is not payable on bottling wastage, no useful purpose would be served by asking the Commissioner to reconsider the matter.