Research › Browse › Judgment

Supreme Court of India · body

1999 DIGILAW 1510 (SC)

State Of U. P. v. Mohan Meakins LTD.

1999-12-06

body1999
( 1 ) DELAY condoned. ( 2 ) LEAVE granted. ( 3 ) RESPONDENT had filed a writ petition challenging the demand which was being raised by the appellant herein in respect of the duty which was first claimed from M/s. Shyam Mohan Sita Ram which was an L-2 licensee. ( 4 ) THE respondent who was an L-1 licensee, is stated to have made deliveries to the said L-2 licensee. When payments were not made by L-2 licensee on the basis of the details of supplies stated to have been made by the respondent to the licensee, the Department sought to realise the Excise Duty from L-1 licensee. The reason for doing this was that it appears that L-2 licensee had filed a civil suit in which a decree was passed to the effect that the supplies in question had not been received by L-2 licensee. ( 5 ) IT is not in dispute that if delivery is not received by L-2 licensee then L-1 licensee, namely, the respondent would be liable to pay the assessed duty. It is, however, contended by Mr. Pankaj Kaira, learned counsel appearing for the respondent that the respondent was not a party in the Suit which was filed by L-2 licensee. Be that as it may, as far as the department is concerned, if there is an adjudication in the Civil court to the effect that the deliveries were not received by the L-2 licensee from the respondent then as long as that order stands, the department would be within its rights to proceed and recover the fee from the L-1 licensee, namely, the respondent. What remedies are open to the L-1 licensee against L-2 licensee is not a concern of the Department. The payment of any duty by the L-1 licensee may or may not give a right to the L-1 licensee to recover the same from the L-2 licensee. But we are not concerned with that in the present case. As far as the Department is concerned, in view of the subsisting order of the Civil court, it was within its jurisdiction to have claimed the fee from the respondent. The judgment of the High court is accordingly set aside and the writ Petition No. 699/96 filed by the respondent is dismissed. ( 6 ) THE Civil appeal is allowed.