SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2023 Supreme(Gau) 293

DEVASHIS BARUAH
Abhijit International – Appellant
Versus
State Of Assam – Respondent


Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
Mr. I. Choudhury, Mr. N. J. Khataniar, Mr. B. Kaushik, Mr. K. P. Pathak, Standing Counsel, Excise Department Mr. B. Choudhury, Adv

JUDGMENT :

Heard Mr. I. Choudhury, the learned Senior counsel assisted by Mr. N. J. Khataniar and Mr. B. Kaushik, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners and Mr. K. P. Pathak, the learned Standing counsel appearing on behalf of the Excise Department. I have also heard Mr. B. Choudhury, the learned Standing counsel appearing on behalf of the Finance Department.

2. All the writ petitions have been taken up together as the facts involved therein are similar and the issue is same. For the purpose of appreciating the dispute involved herein, it would be relevant to take note of that the petitioners herein in the batch of writ petitions were earlier running their business as “Bonded Warehouse” within the meaning of Rule 2(ii) of the Assam Bonded Warehouse Rules, 1965. For the purpose of convenience, the said Rule is quoted hereinbelow:

    “2(ii) “Bonded warehouse” means the premises or any part of the premises approved and licensed for deposit or storage of spirits on which duty has not been paid;”

3. A perusal of the above Rule would show that a “Bonded Warehouse” means


Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top