9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (10) TMI 394X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... without allowing it to flow back to the state coffers would amount to unjust-enrichment as noticed by this Court in the case of Mafatlal Industries Ltd. vs. Union of India & Ors. [1996 (12) TMI 50 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA ]. The High Court had not committed any error whatsoever which would call for our interference under Article 136 of the Constitution of India - If for any reason the respondents/other authorities had issued notices directing the appellants and other wine manufacturers to deposit the excise duty which according to the respondents was collected by the manufacturers, it was for the manufacturers to file appropriate reply thereby bringing it to their notice that they have not collected such excise duty and the same was also re ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of Maharashtra, therefore, for the aforesaid reasons issued a notification thereby exempting the levy of excise duty to wine manufacturers partly for the year 2001 and remitted the whole of the excise duty with effect from 18.06.2004. 8. The respondent herein-Shri Vilas, Son of Dongarlal Jaiswal, retailer of country liquor, thereafter had approached the Writ Court, inter alia, contending that though the State Government had exempted the manufacturers from payment of excise duty, the manufacturers in the garb of collecting M.R.P have included the excise duty in the Maximum Retail Prices of such country/foreign liquor manufactured by them and, therefore, had requested the Court to direct the manufacturers to remit/deposit the excise duty so ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... oncerned by filing their reply to the effect that they have not collected excise duty and, therefore, the payment/deposit of the excise duty would not arise. 11. Aggrieved by the main order as well as the order passed in the Review Petitions, some of the wine manufacturers are before us in these appeals. 12. We have heard learned senior counsel appearing for the parties to the lis and also the learned counsel for the State of Maharashtra. We have also perused the impugned judgment and order passed by the High Court. 13. In our considered view, the High Court has not committed any error whatsoever which would call for our interference under Article 136 of the Constitution of India. Accordingly, the Civil Appeals are dismissed. 14. Howeve ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
