Case: State Of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Firm Gappulal Etc

The liquor contractors were subject inter alia to the following conditions at auction which the Government wants to enforce:"In case the fixed monthly quantity is not taken in any month, the concerning contractor shall be liable to pay to the Government the amount of PRATIKAR at the rate fixed by the Government for spiced spirit and plain spirit to the extent to which it would be less than the fixed monthly minimum quantity and the amount of such PRATIKAR shall be paid within the tenth day of the month such shortage is concerned. Security to the extent of one sixth to one tenth of the whole of the amount of yearly PRATIKAR will have to beis excise duty.

Court's reasoning:
There is no dispute that in these appeals the demand notice is in respect of duty on liquor which has not beenappeals are, therefore, not of the type of Panna Lals case (supra). These appeals are of the type of Bimal Chandra Banerjees case (supra). These appeals relate to the demand of excise only in respect of undrawn liquor. The High Court rightly quashed the demands.