1984 (6) TMI 228

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... the firm M/s. Chokshi Kantilal Sankalchand and Bros. consisting of three partners, namely ; Shri Kantilal Sankal-chand Bhavsar, Smt. Maniben Ranchhodlal and Shri Ramanlal Sankalchand Bhavsar held the Gold dealer's licence No. ADI/84/G/68. After the death of Shri Ramanlal Sankalchand which took place on 11-5-1980 they applied for a change in the constitution of the firm and requested to induct Shri Pankaj-kumar Ramanlal Bhavsar, son of the deceased and Smt. Chandrikaben Manu-bhai Bhavsar. It appears that the Collector of Central Excise approved the induction of Shri Pankajkumar but rejected the request for induction of Smt. Chandrikaben. This order of the Collector was communicated to the firm through the Assistant Collector. The appellants....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ployment, and therefore, it became necessary to induct his wife as one of the partners. Therefore the learned Collector was unjustified in rejecting the request. He further contended that the learned Collector has relied on sub-rule (b) of Rule 2 for rejecting the request and the rule is not applicable to the facts of this case since the request was only for inducting a partner to the existing firm, and not a request for issue a fresh licence. He, therefore, urged that the order passed by the learned Collector may be set aside. 5. Shri Krishan Kumar, however, contended that admittedly Smt. Chandrikaben is not a partner of the firm. No fresh partnership had been entered into by the parties. Allowing of induction of Chandrikaben will ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... power by reason of the authorisation made by the Administrator. For all purposes and intent the Collector exercises the powers of the Administrator, and therefore, the order passed by the Collector should be deemed to be an order passed by the Administrator. The Act does not provide for an appeal against the order of Administrator to any authority. But then sub-Section  (5) of Section 4 provides 'subject to any general or special direction given or condition imposed by the Administrator any person authorised by the Administrator to exercise any powers may exercise those powers in the same manner and with the same effect of if they had been conferred on the person directly by this Act and not by way of authorisation'. The effect ....