High CourtsDivision Bench(2006) 09 PAT CK 0029

Iceberg Industries Limited vs The State of Bihar and Others

Patna High Court · Decided on 27 September 2006 · Citation: (2007) 1 PLJR 41

HON’BLE JUDGES
C.M. Prasad, J · Aftab Alam, J
CASE NUMBER
CWJC No. 11280 of 2006

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

4 paragraphs · 370 words
1.

Having regard to the over-all larger interests and the policy of industrialisation of the State followed by the Government. Mr. Advocate General stated that the Government would be loath to close down the petitioner''s brewery and the Dist. Magistrate was compelled to take the ultimate action of cancellation of the petitioner''s manufacturing licences for its gross and wanton violation of practically every rule in the Excise Book. The Advocate General further stated that the State Govt., may yet consider to allow the petitioner to run the brewery/manufactory provided it recompenses the State''s loss of revenue with a reasonable amount of penalty'' by way of penance. The Advocate General further stated that the permission to allow the petitioner to run its manufactory would indeed be subject to the stringent condition that in future it would follow all the provisions of the Excise Act, the Rules framed thereunder, the terms and conditions of the licence and the instructions issued by the competent authorities from time to time in letter and spirit. Mr. Jain, Senior Advocate appearing for the petitioner accepted all the conditions subject to which the offer was made by the Advocate General. Mr. Jain agreed that his client would pay the full amount of excise duty and sales tax as determined by the Collector in his order, dated 30.8.2006.

2.

This leaves the question of penalty payable by the petitioner. Mr. Advocate General submitted that penalty was necessary in the case for the petitioner to show penance and also its resolve to not breach the provisions of the law in future. We think that an amount equal to the amount of excise duty and sales tax would be the proper penalty and would meet the ends of justice in the case.

3.

In view of the above we direct the State Govt., to restore the petitioner''s manufacturing licence(s) and other licences issued under the Excise Act on payment of the full amount of excise duty and sales tax as determined in the Collector''s order, dated 30.8.2006 plus an equal amount by way of penalty.

4.

This writ petition stands disposed of. Let copies of the order be given both to the counsel for the petitioner and the Advocate General.