TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2020 (1) TMI 413
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.C. MISHRA And HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK ROSHAN For the Petitioners : Mr. Indrajeet Sinha, Advocate Mr. Arpan Mishra, Advocate Mr. Sumit Prakash, Advocate Mr. Diwakar Jha, Advocate ( Advocates in respective cases ) For the Respondents : Mr. Ajit Kumar, A.G. ORDER Heard learned counsels for the petitioners Companies and learned Advocate General for the State. 2. As the issues involved in all these writ applications are the same, they have been heard together and are being disposed of by this common order. 3. The petitioners Companies are engaged in the business of distilling / compounding and blending of foreign liquor and bottling and selling the same, for which they have been given license by the St....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ications have been filed challenging the vires of Rules 9 and 36A of the aforesaid Rules framed by the Board of Revenue, but in view of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Shree Krishna Gayanoday Sugar Ltd. Vs. State of Bihar and Others., reported in (1996) 10 SCC 11, and the subsequent Judgment of the Patna High Court in McDowell & Co. Ltd. Vrs. The State of Bihar & Ors., reported in 2004 (3) PLJR 777, learned counsels for the petitioners have given up the challenge to the vires of the aforesaid Rules. 6. Having given up the challenge to the vires of these Rules, learned counsels for the petitioners have pointed out that the fees / costs leviable from them for deployment of the excise staff in their premises, are not pred....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Rules leaves no manner of doubt that it was open to the appellant to grant the exclusive privilege of manufacturing and selling wine etc. to the respondent only provided it was, apart from making any other payment, also willing to pay the salaries and allowances referred to in the aforesaid provisions which for the sake of convenience have been described as establishment charges, and which were sought to be recovered as such under the impugned notice of demand. The respondent- Company was not under any obligation to take the licence. It was open to it to have refrained from taking any licence under the Act and the Rules if it was not willing to pay the price as required by the government for the grant of privilege to manufacture and sell in....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... distilleries / compounding and blending plants, and further whether if one excise staff is deployed in more than one distillery / compounding and blending plant, can the State Government recover the entire expenses incurred upon such staff, separately from all the distilleries / compounding and blending plants, in which such staff is deployed. The only plausible answers to these questions can be, that the State Government can only realise from the distilleries / compounding and blending plants, the actual expenses incurred on the salary, allowances etc., of the excise staff deployed in such distilleries / compounding and blending plants, and in case one excise staff is deployed in more than one distillery / compounding and blending plant, ....