9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (11) TMI 113X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... consequential direction to the respondents to release the challan. 2. The petitioner is a holder of A-4 licence for running retail liquor shop. When certain quantity of beer belonging to the petitioner was being transported, the same was intercepted at Gopalpuram, near Huzurnagar town and the stock was seized. A criminal case was registered against the petitioner. The petitioner requested for compounding the case. The petitioner's request was recommended by respondent No. 2 and accepted by respondent No. 1 vide his proceedings Cr. No. 17054/2010/CPE/G2, dated 17-1-2011, subject to the condition of the petitioner paying compounding fee of Rs. 50,000/- and also payment of the value of the seized stock. The petitioner accordingly deposi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to compound an offence falling under Section 38 of the Act, held that the phrases "compounding fee" and "compensation" are used as synonymous terms and that once the compounding fee is collected, the owner of the goods shall not be called upon to pay the full value of the stock seized after payment of such compounding fee or compensation. The Division Bench of this Court in V. Srinivas Reddy (supra) however dealt with Section 47(2) of the Act and interpreted the said provision as conferring power on the Commissioner to order compounding on payment of the sum of money or value of the stock seized, or both, as the case may be, in accordance with the provisions of sub-section (1) of Section 47-A of the Act. The said view is reiterated in Thuti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n him in a sound and rational manner by directing payment of the value of the seized stock, having already levied the compounding fee of Rs. 50,000/-. The petitioner, having already paid the value of the seized stock to A.P. Beverages Corporation Limited, it would be wholly iniquitous to collect the same once again from him. No specific reasons have been assigned by the Commissioner to subject the petitioner to such a harsh penalty. 7. On the facts of this case, as discussed above, I am of the opinion that the condition directing payment of the value of the seized duty paid liquor, is wholly irrational and unreasonable. Accordingly, the impugned order, to the extent of stipulating the condition of payment of the value of the seized st ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
