BRAJ KISHORE JAISWAL Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) AS both these writ applications involved a common question of law, both the applications govern by this common order.

(2.) IN both the applications the petitioner is the same, who is a wholesale licence dealer in country made liquor. It is not in dispute that the petitioner was appointed as a whole sale dealer for Hazaribagh and Dhanbad respectively. Whereas in case of dealership for Hazaribagh Zone, licence is effective from 1.7.1995 to 31.3.1996 and in respect of Dhanbad Zone, his licence is effective from 11.7.1995 to 31.3.1996. He purchased countrymade liquor from the distilleries and after paying duty stock the, same for sale to retailers. The petitioner brought the country made liquor in his stock before 31.3.1996 by paying duty at the prevalent rate of Rs. 26/ - per LPL. The liquor as stocked was 25606.3 LPL on both the Zones namely, Hazaribagh and Dhanbad. With effect from 1.4.1996 the rate of Excise duty was enhanced from Rs. 26/ - to Rs. 35/ - per LPL and as such, by a letter dated 3.4.1996 the respondents directed the petitioner to deposit difference amount @ Rs. 9/ - per LPL on the liquor already stocked by the petitioner before 1.4.1996.

(3.) MR . Anil Kumar Sinha, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, has strongly contended that the petitioner cannot be compelled to pay Excise duty in enhanced rate of Rs. 35/ - per LPL on the liquor which was purchased and already stocked before 31.3.1996. Referring to Annexure 3, he contends that the State Government has clarified in an equivocal term that the enhanced duty shall be made effective with effect from 1.4.1996. However, as the concerned respondents were restraining the petitioner from selling the whole stock, the petitioner had no option but to deposit the difference of duty @ Rs. 9/ - in pursuance of the order as contained in Annexure 3.