https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=166110 The Supreme Court partially allowed the State's appeal, affirming that the respondents' writ petitions were not maintainable and that the amount charged was for the privilege of selling liquor, not excise duty. The issue of the adequacy of publicity for the reauction was remanded to the High Court for further examination, with instructions to provide findings to the Supreme Court within three months. en-us Mon, 21 Apr 1980 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 26 Aug 2014 11:39:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=166110 The Supreme Court partially allowed the State's appeal, affirming that the respondents' writ petitions were not maintainable and that the amount charged was for the privilege of selling liquor, not excise duty. The issue of the adequacy of publicity for the reauction was remanded to the High Court for further examination, with instructions to provide findings to the Supreme Court within three months. Case-Laws Customs Mon, 21 Apr 1980 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=166110