JUDGMENT

Kirpal, J.-The only question which arises for consideration in these appeals is whether the appellants who are F.L.1 and F.L. 3 licence-holders under the Abkari Act of Kerala can be made liable to pay any difference in excise duty due to subsequent increase on the unsold stock of liquor which remained with them at the close of the financial year having purchased the same from the State-owned Kerala State Beverages (Manufacturing and Marketing) Corporation Limited on which duty has already been paid by the State Corporation when it was issued out of the bonded warehouse.

2. Under the provisions of the Abkari Act different types of licences are issued. As far as the appellants are concerned F.L.1 licence is issued to stockists and retailers and F.L. 3 licences are issued to bars and restaurants. The holders of F.L.1 licences can purchase liquor for sale from the aforesaid Beverage Corporation to whom F.L. 9 licence is issued. These stockists and retailers then sell liquor to other dealers or to consumers while the holders of F.L. 3 licences sell liquor in the bars and restaurants run by them.

3. It appears that prior to 1st April, 1996 the duty of excise on Indian-made foreign