1975 (12) TMI 190

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....[From the judgment and order dated the (1) 20-1-1971, (2) 17-2-1971, (3) 21-8-1971 of the Madhya Pradesh High Court (Gwalior Bench) in (1) Miscellaneous Petitions Nos. 19/70 & 10, 109 and 111 of 1969 and 18 and 20 of 1970, (2) in 9 and 10 of 1971 and (3) 123-125 and 127 of 1970 respectively.] I. N. Shroff for the appellant. A. K. Sen (in CA 1751/71) for the respondents. Hargobind Misra (in CAs ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ny month, the concerning contractor shall be liable to pay to the Government the amount of PRATIKAR at the rate fixed by the Government for spiced spirit and plain spirit to the extent to which it would be less than the fixed monthly minimum quantity and the amount of such PRATIKAR shall be paid within the tenth day of the month such shortage is concerned. Security to the extent of one sixth to on....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....'s case (supra) this Court held that a levy of excise duty on undrawn liquor imposed by the State was exercise of powers which the State did not possess. In the recent decision of this Court in Panna Lal's case (supra) this Court said that there is no levy of excise duty in enforcing the payment of the guaranteed sum or the stipulated lump sum mentioned in the licenses. It was also poin....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ulated amount for exclusive privilege allowed by the State to the contractor. The lump sum amount payable for the exclusive privilege is not to be confused with the issue price. In essence what was sought to be recovered from the liquor contractors in Panna Lal's case (supra) was the shortfall occasioned on account of failure on the part of liquor contractor to fulfil the terms of license. ....