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

1961 Supreme(MP) 63

P.V.DIXIT, K.L.PANDEY
MALKHANSINGH NIRPATSINGH – Appellant
Versus
INSPECTOR OF CENTRAL EXCISE, P. I. – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
A.L.Halve, H.L.KHASKALAM, J.K.Thakar

PANDEY, J.

( 1 ) THIS petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution is directed against certain proceedings taken under the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 (hereinafter called the Act ). These proceedings were initiated for an alleged, contravention of Rule 151 of the Central Excise Rules (hereinafter called the Rules)framed under the Act and culminated in an order dated 6 July 1959 by which the assistant Collector, Central Excise, Jabalpur (respondent 3), held that a part of the tobacco contained in 327 bags stocked in the petitioner's private bonded warehouse was clandestinely removed and replaced with inferior stuff and directed the petitioner to pay Rs. 30-319/ig/ as duty and Rs. 250/- as penalty. The above-mentioned 327 bags of tobacco were also thereby forfeited but there was a direction that, if the petitioner paid a fine of Rs. 500/-within 3 months from the date of the order, the tobacco would be regarded as duty paid and returned to him. The petitioner prays for (i) a writ of certiorari to quash the proceedings taken against him, including the show-cause notice dated 17 November 1958 and the order dated 6 July 1959; (ii) two writs of mandamus, one directing th





















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