Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2009 DIGILAW 1561 (RAJ)

Dhanu Devi v. State of Rajasthan

2009-07-08

H.R.PANWAR

body2009
JUDGMENT 1. - Issue notice for final disposal. 2. Mr. M.R. Singhvi representing the Excise Department present in Court is directed to accept notice for the respondents. He accepts the notice. Learned Counsel for the petitioner has supplied the copy of writ petition to Mr. Singhvi. With the consent of learned Counsel for the parties, the matter is finally heard and disposed of at admission stage. 3. By the instant writ petition, the petitioner has challenged the order Annexure 5 dated 17.07.2007 passed by respondent Board of Revenue, Ajmer whereby the appeal filed by the petitioner under Section 69(5) of the Rajasthan Excise Act, 1950 (for short "the Act of 1950" hereinafter) against the order of Excise Commissioner, Udaipur dated 21.02.2005 came to be dismissed on the ground that the petitioner has not deposited 75% of the amount of demand created by the order appealed against. 4. Heard learned Counsel for the parties. 5. It is submitted by learned Counsel for the petitioner that petitioner is a registered owner of the truck bearing No. RJ-19 G 2941 which came to be seized by the police i.e. Police Station Sojat City, District Pali in crime report No. 89/2004 on 15.04.2004 under the provisions of Section 54-A of the Act of 1950. The Excise Commissioner determined the amount of Rs. 75,000/- as penalty and raised the demand. That order came to be challenged by the petitioner by way of an appeal. Though the petitioner had deposited 75% of the amount of penalty on 25.05.2007, may be slightly delayed but at any rate, much before the appeal came up for hearing before the respondent Board of Revenue on 17.07.2007, there was a valid deposit of the amount. From the perusal of the order Annexure 2 dated 25.05.2007, it appears that Counsel Shri Gupta appearing on behalf of the appellant submitted receipt of depositing 75% of the amount of penalty by enclosing the challan/receipt therewith. A certified copy of the order sheet of the Board of Revenue dated 25.05.2007 has been placed on record as Annexure 2. 6. From the perusal of the order Annexure 2 dated 25.05.2007, it appears that Counsel Shri Gupta appearing on behalf of the appellant submitted receipt of depositing 75% of the amount of penalty by enclosing the challan/receipt therewith. A certified copy of the order sheet of the Board of Revenue dated 25.05.2007 has been placed on record as Annexure 2. 6. Having regard to the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case as also the fact that though the appeal did not accompany the proof of payment of 75% of the amount of demand created by the Excise Commissioner by order appealed against but the fact remains that amount has been deposited with the Board of Revenue vide Annexure 2 and therefore, in my view, it would be appropriate to remand the matter to the respondent Board of Revenue with a direction to hear and decide the appeal filed by the petitioner on merit. 7. Consequently, the writ petition is allowed. The order impugned Annexure 5 dated 17.07.2007 is set aside and the matter is remanded to the respondent Board of Revenue to hear and decide the appeal filed by the petitioner on merit in accordance with law afresh. This order is in peculiar facts and circumstances of the case and therefore, it shall not be treated as precedent. In the facts and circumstances of the case, there shall be no order as to costs.Writ Petition Allowed. *******