9911796707
TMI Blog1986 (8) TMI 430X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , for the period from 17th August, 1984 to 21st August, 1984. Bank guarantee for an amount of Rs. 1,54,469 was furnished for such release of the goods. For the period from 9th September, 1984 to 2nd November, 1984, 41 more lorry loads of empty bottles were intercepted at that check post allegedly for the reason that the consignments were not accompanied by prescribed documents. By order dated 19th August, 1985, under section 29 of the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, the adjudicating authority imposed a penalty of Rs. 1,54,469 in respect of the 12 lorry loads intercepted upto 21st August, 1984. An appeal was filed before the Appellate Assistant Commissioner, Cannanore, against that adjudication order. 2.. O.P. No. 7542 of 1984 was filed by th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to have entered into lease arrangement with M/s. McDowell & Company, had placed a number of orders for the bottles from the manufacturers, M/s. Glass and Ceramics Decorators, Bombay, for supply of bottles. According to the leasing arrangements, the bottles were to be despatched to M/s. Janso Soft Drinks (P.) Ltd., Alleppy, which, apparently, is a sister concern of M/s. Janso Foods (P.) Ltd., Bombay, who was given the franchise of bottling and selling certain soft drinks. 3.. The complaint of the appellant was that in spite of the finding contained in exhibit. P1, that only the owner of the bottles was liable to pay the sales tax, exhibit P2, notice dated 9th April, 1986, was issued to it requiring payment of the penalty within a. period of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... inable. It was also submitted that the learned single Judge erred in holding that the appellant was liable to return the goods which were released to it on the basis of bonded obligations, because such obligation was confined only to payment of tax or penalty if the appellant was found to be liable to be attached under the Kerala General Sales Tax Act. 5.. The facts are not in controversy. 41 lorry loads of empty bottles consigned to the appellant were detained at the check post during the period 9th September, 1984, to 2nd November, 1984, and they were released to the appellant pursuant to orders of this Court in C.M.P. No. 23494 of 1984. Had the goods been available in detention, the respondents could easily have proceeded against those ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o be enforced by issue of exhibits P2, P4 and P5 is appealable at the instance of the owner, M/s. Indian Reprographic Systems, New Delhi, or even at the instance of the present appellant. An equally efficacious alternative remedy being available, there is no reason why this Court shall exercise its extraordinary jurisdiction under article 226 of the Constitution of India in this matter. We do not think that the petition under article 226 of the Constitution is an appropriate forum to decide the questions relating to the grant of franchise for production and bottling of soft drinks to one company; lease of bottles to another company-the appellant-for bottling on behalf of yet another company and supply of bottles by the manufacturer to a lea ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
