IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR THURSDAY, THE 12TH AUGUST 2010 / 21ST SRAVANA 1932 OP.No. 24872 of 2002(J) ---------------------------- PETITIONER: -------------- M/S.MC DOWELL & COMPANY LIMITED, CHERTHALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS ASSISTANT VICE PRESIDENT, M.K.SELVARAJ. BY ADV. SRI.JAYASANKAR A.K. RESPONDENTS: ----------------- 1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY (REVENUE DEPARTMENT), GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE COMMISSIONER OF EXCISE, COMMISSIONERATE OF EXCISE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF EXCISE, MCDOWELL DISTILLERY, CHERTHALA. BY ADV.SMT.SUDHA DEVI, GOVERNMENT PLEADER FOR R1,R2&R3. THIS ORIGINAL PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 12/08/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: OP.No. 24872/2002 A P P E N D I X PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT. P1 : COPY OF the DEMAND NOTICE No.McD(x)14/93 DTD. 9.11.95 ISSUED BY R3 TO PETITIONER. EXT. P2 : COPY OF DEMAND NOTICE No.MxD(x)14/93 DTD. 10.11.95 ISSUED BY R3 TO PETITIONER. EXT. P3 : COPY OF COVERING LETTER DTD. 22.11.95 ISSUED BY PETITIONER TO R3. EXT. P4 : COPY OF COVERING LETTER DTD. 17.10.95 ISSUED BY PETITIONER TO R3. EXT. P5 : COPY OF INTIMATION No.McD(x)31/91 DTD. 13.11.99 ISSUED BY R3 TO PETITIONER. EXT. P6 : COPY OF APPEAL FILED BEFORE R2 DTD. 24.12.99. EXT. P7 : COPY OF STAY PETITION FILED BEFORE R2 DTD. 24.12.99. EXT. P8 : COPY OF ORDER DTD. 24.8.02 OF R2. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL. // True Copy // P.A. to Judge. smp T.R. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J. --------------------------------------- O.P.No.24872 OF 2002 --------------------------------------- Dated this the 12th day of August, 2010. J U D G M E N T The petitioner-Company is engaged in the manufacture of Indian Made Foreign Liquor. It has got distillery at Cherthala. 2. The petitioner was served with Exhibits P1 and P2 demand notices for the years 1988-89, 1989-90 and 1990-91 with regard to the transit wastages of IMFL. It is pointed out that even though the petitioner disputed its liabilities to pay the amounts, on the ground that the Beverages Corporation had already remitted a portion of the duty on transit wastages for the periods in question, the petitioner paid the amount under protest as evidenced by Exhibits P3 and P4. It is pointed out that the amount was appropriated by the 3rd respondent towards alleged interest dues on Excise Duty on transit wastages. Exhibit P5 is the communication in this regard. The same was challenged by the petitioner in appeal as per Exhibit P6, and Exhibit P7 is the stay petition. By Exhibit P8, the application for stay was O.P. No.24872/2002 2 rejected, which is under challenge in this original petition. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the appeal Exhibit P6 is still pending and a direction may be issued to dispose of the same within a time frame. This Court had issued an interim order which was being extended from time to time. Therefore, there will be a direction to the 2nd respondent Commissioner of Excise to take a decision on Exhibit P6 appeal, after hearing the petitioner, within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The interim order passed by this Court will continue till the matter is disposed of. This original petition is disposed of as above. T.R. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR JUDGE smp