O.CHHINNAPPA REDDY, M.M.DUTT
State of A. P. : Pratap Gaur: A. Ramprasad: State of A. P. – Appellant
Versus
Y. Prabhakara Reddy: Superintendent Of Excise: Superintendent Of Excise: D. Buchanna – Respondent
Judgement
CHINNAPPA REDDY, J.:- The primary question involved in those appeals and petitions is whether under the Excise Law prevailing in the State of Andhra Pradesh. the Government is entitled to claim from the Excise Contractors who have failed to lift the Minimum Guaranteed Quantity of liquor the amount said to represent the excise duty component in the issue price of liquor relating to such unlifted quantity of liquor. A Full Bench of three judges of the High Court of Andhra Pradesh, in V. Narasimha Rao v. Superintendent of Excise AIR 1974 Andh Pra 157, held that the Government could but this view was overruled by a Full Bench of Five Judges of the same High Court in Atluri Brahmanandam v. Tahsildar of Gannavaram AIR 1977 Andh Pra 196 where it was held that the Government could not. It is the judgment of the Full Bench of Five Judges which is in question in the appeals and petitions filed by the Government. With a view to cure the defects pointed out by the Full Bench of Five Judges and to validate the demands raised by the Government, the Andhra Pradesh Legislature enacted the Andhra Pradesh Excise Amendment Act X of 1984. Demands raised pursuant to the Amending Act were uphel
relied on : State Bank of Haryaaa v. Jage Ram
Bimal Chandra Banerjee v. State of M.P.
State of M.P. v. Firm Gappulal
Excise Commissioner v. Ram Kumar
relied on : State Bank of Haryana v. Jage Ram
referred to : Panna Lal v. State of Rajasthan
relied on : Har Shankar v. Deputy Excise and Taxation Commer.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.