M/S. SPENCER DISTILLERS AND BREWERIES (P) LTD. HATIA, RANCHI Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND THROUGH SECRETARY, EXCISE DEPTT. GOVT, OF JHARKHAND AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) I have heard both sides.

(2.) The petitioner is brewery and according to the petitioner's case, the petitioner does not carry on any operation of "compounding" or "blending" of foreign liquor in its premises. This factual situation is not disputed by the respondents, who have filed a counter-affidavit.

(3.) The petitioner is being required to pay something known as 'establishment cost'. The petitioner challenged the imposition of the aforesaid 'establishment cost' on the ground that there was no provision permitting imposition of such levy. In response, Rule 36-A of the Rules under Bihar Excise Act, 1915 have been relied upon by the respondents' side. According to that rule, the Excise Commissioner is to decide whether a whole-time or a part time excise staff is necessary for the proper supervision of the operation of "compounding" or "blending" of foreign liquor in any premises and further that the Excise Commissioner shall decide such fee/levy which would be payable by the licensee towards the actual cost of the excise staff employed for the purpose of the said rule.