Y. BHASKAR RAO, J.

( 1 ) THIS batch of writ petitions is filed questioning the orders passed by the commissioner of Excise, Government of Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad to the extent they direct the licensees-petitioners to pay the compounding fee and the value of the stocks seized and sales tax for the purpose of release of stocks. The impugned orders were passed on the applications made by the petitioners under Sec. 47-A of the A. P. Excise Act, 1968, for short the Act , for compounding the offences registered against them. Since the question of law involved in all the writ petitions being one and the same, they are being disposed of by this common order,

( 2 ) WE will take up the facts of Writ Petition No. 4671 of 1992 for thefurpose of deciding the issue.

( 3 ) IN that case, F. L. 24 licence was granted to the petitioner to conduct business in excisable articles and he has been doing so in the name and style of M/s. Amruta Wines. The Excise authorities have inspected the shop of the petitioner and found certain quantity of non-duty paid liquor in his possession 5 and seized the same. Then the authorities have issued show cause notice to the petitioner, who submitted his explanation. Ultimately, the licence of the petitioner was cancelled by the Excise Superintendent vide his proceedings dated 10-10-1991. Aggrieved by that order, the petitioner filed an appeal before the Commissioner of Excise, the first respondent. The petitioner also filed an application under Sec. 47-A of the Act to compound the offence. The first respondent compounded the offence directing the petitioner to pay a fee of rs. 15,000 / - and the value of the seized stock and the sales-tax for their release.

( 4 ) THE contentions raised on behalf of the petitioners are that the direction 15 of the Commissioner of Excise for payment of value of the seized duty-paid stocks for getting them released is arbitrary and illegal, that fixation of compounding fee by the Commissioner of Excise at a uniform rate of rs. 15,000/-in all. the cases irrespective of the quantity of the non-duty paid stocks is arbitrary, illegal and discriminatory and that no notice was issued 20 to the owners of the stocks, where stock is seized from the transporter, before imposing compounding fee.

( 5 ) THE Government Pleader contended that Sections 45, 46 and 47 of the act provide for compounding of offences and Sec. 47-A empowers the commissioner of Excise to fix compounding fee and order release of property seized on payment of its value and that the provisions are incorporated in the Act so as to curb the illegal sale of non-duty paid excisable articles and avoid loss of public money and also to check the violation of conditions of licence. 30

( 6 ) TO appreciate the above contentions, it is relevant to refer to the Statement of Objects and Reasons of the Act, which reads:"at present the Andhra Pradesh (Telangana Area) Abkari Act, 1316 F. (Act 1 of 1316f) and the Andhra Pradesh (Telangana Area) Intoxicating drugs Act, 1333 F. (Act IV of 1333f) are in force in the Telangana Area 35 of the State. The Andhra Pradesh (Andhra Area) Abkari Act, 1886, has ceased to be in force in the Andhra Area by virtue of Section 2 of the andhra Pradesh (Andhra Area) Prohibition Act, 1937. However, in case the State Government declares by notification under the proviso to section 2 of the Andhra Pradesh (Andhra Area) Prohibition Act, 1937 40 that the provisions of the Act other than Sections 1, 3 and 6 shall cease to be in force in any local area on any particular date the Andhra Pradesh (Andhra Area) Abkari Act, 1886 will revive and come into force in that local area from the said date. It will thus be seen that on the statute book there are in the two areas of the State two sets of laws relating to the 45 production, manufacture, possession, transport, purchase and sale of intoxicating liquors and drugs and the levy of duties of excise and countervailing duties on alcoholic liquors for human consumption, indi

Click Here to Read the rest of this document