PRAVINBHAI B PATEL Vs. COMMISSIONER OF EXCISE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) RULE . By consent Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard Counsel for the parties.

(2.) BY way of this petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner challenges the orders passed by the Commissioner of Excise, Daman and Diu dated 12th December, 1997 and the order passed by the Administrator, Union Territory of Daman and Diu dated 22nd June, 1998 whereby Maruti Car bearing No. DD-03-A-2016 belonging to the petitioner has been ordered to be confiscated and to be released to the petitioner on payment of Rs. One lakh to the Government and further directing the Petitioner to deposit a sum of Rs.2,50,000/- with the Government representing the quantum of excise duty and penalty for carrying out activities in violation of the excise law.

(3.) BY an order dated 12th December, 1997 Commissioner of Excise, Daman and Diu held that during the course of proceedings, the owner of the vehicle informed that the liquor was lifted from M/s. Raj Wines and that it was being transported to Paramount Bar and Restaurant at Moti Daman. No cash memo was found to have been issued. The Driver could not give any satisfactory explanation for carrying this quantity of liquor in the vehicle. The order states that "It is apparent that the liquor was being transported for other purpose. The accused persons have violated Sections