9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (4) TMI 281X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... has been passed after due compliance of principles of natural justice and factual foundation of the impugned order has not been disputed. Blacklisting of the petitioner firm for a period of five years cannot be said to be in any manner excessive of harsh penalty. - None of the impugned orders passed by the Excise Commissioner and the District Excise Officer suffer from any illegality - Decided against Petitioner. - S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.11448/2014, Stay Application No.10654/2014 - - - Dated:- 19-3-2015 - Mohammad Rafiq J. For the Appellant : Shri M.M. Ranjan Shri Rajat Ranjan ORDER Petitioner no.1 M/s Red Elan Distributors Pvt. Ltd., and petitioner no.2 Vikas Lamba, the authorized signatory and director of pet ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ct Excise officer, Jaipur, who, in turn, submitted report to the Assistant Commissioner, Government of NCT, Delhi, showing the discrepancies and asked further information. The Excise Officer (South) Jaipur City, vide letter dated 31.01.2012, again sent a reminder to the District Excise officer, Jaipur, for further action. Thereafter, the District Excise Officer, Jaipur, registered a case No.35 under Section 58-C of the Rajasthan Excise Act on the ground that petitioner had supplied different wines than the one prescribed under the export pass by the Government of NCT, Delhi. During investigation, a note was prepared by the Assistant Excise Officer, Jaipur Circle (South) to the effect that Rambagh Palace Hotel accepted Permit of the Governme ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2012-13. The application was submitted on 02.06.2012. With the application, the photo copies of the authorization letter and affidavit were also filed. On that basis, the registration was permitted. When the aforesaid complaints were received with respect to unauthorized registration for Grey Goose Vodka and Gleanfiddich Single Malt Scotch, that the petitioners have not been authorized, they were served with show cause notice dated 10.07.2012. Another notice was served on 27.08.2012. The petitioners did not submit reply thereto. The Excise Commissioner was satisfied with the fact that the petitioners have obtained the label registration on the basis of false affidavit and forged documents and accordingly debarred them from dealing with the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
