Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Delhi High Court - Orders

Indo Spirits vs Commissioner Of Excise Government Of ... on 14 November, 2022

Author: Yashwant Varma

Bench: Yashwant Varma

                    $~55
                    *    IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
                    +    W.P.(C) 15529/2022
                         INDO SPIRITS                             ..... Petitioner
                                          Through: Mr. Sameer Rohatgi, Mr.
                                                     Kartikey Singh, Mr. Amit
                                                     Mehavia and Ms. Tannishtha
                                                     Singh, Advs.
                                          versus
                         COMMISSIONER OF EXCISE GOVERNMENT OF
                         NATIONAL CAPITAL TERRITORY OF DELHI & ORS.
                                                                       ..... Respondents
                                          Through: Mr. Santosh Kumar Tripathy,
                                                     SC with Mr. Arun Panwar,
                                                     Adv. for GNCTD with Mr.
                                                     Ashok Kumar, Section Officer,
                                                     Excise Dept.
                         CORAM:
                         HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YASHWANT VARMA
                                          ORDER

% 14.11.2022 CM APPL. 48307/2022 (for exemption) Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

The application shall stand disposed of.

W.P.(C) 15529/2022 and CM APPL. 48306/2022 (Interim Relief)

1. This writ petition has been preferred seeking the following reliefs:-

"(a) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other similar writ, order or direction commanding the Respondents to allow the Petitioner to sell and transfer the existing stock (including inbound stock) lying with Petitioner or part thereof on the payment of the requisite duty by the manufacturers of the said stock, to any or all of the four corporations, being The Delhi State Industrial and Infrastructure Development Corporation (DSIIDC), Delhi Tourism and Transportation Development Corporation (DTTDC), Delhi Consumer‟s Cooperative Wholesale Store (DCCWS), and Delhi State Civil Supplies Corporation Limited (DSCSC) who are presently running the liquor retail vends in the NCT of Delhi under Rule 56 of the Delhi Excise Rules, 2010;

Or, in the alternative, Issue a writ of mandamus or any other similar writ, order or direction commanding the Respondents to allow the Petitioner to transfer the existing stock (including inbound stock) to the manufacturers/importers of the stock lying at the warehouses, who have already received their L-

Anheuser- Busch InBev India Limited (ii) B9 Beverages Pvt Ltd (iii) Fratelli Wines Pvt Ltd, (iv) Blue Ocean Beverages Pvt Ltd and subsequently to the other manufacturers also as and when they will get their L1, L-1F licenses, who shall be able to sell the said stock to the retail shops on the payment of the requisite duty as per Rule 56 of the Delhi Excise Rules, 2010;

(b) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other similar writ, order or direction commanding the Respondents to allow the Petitioner to transfer the entire stock from the two existing warehouses located at E- 32, Okhla Phase-II, New Delhi and B-79, Okhla Phase-I, New Delhi to an alternative warehouse and for this purpose, issue a further writ of mandamus or any other similar writ, order or direction commanding the Respondents to grant necessary and timely permission, in accordance with law, for the proposed warehouses, wherein the entire stocks from the aforesaid two warehouses shall be transferred;"

2. The grievance of the petitioner essentially is that upon the expiry of the excise license which was held by it, it was left with unsold stock which could not to be disposed of till that date. The submission of Mr. Rohatgi, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, was that although the Deputy Commissioner has been duly moved by way of representations, no action has been taken thereon. It was additionally submitted that the petitioner is presently saddled with huge costs towards rent in respect of storage of the liquor stock in a bonded warehouse and it has made a representation for being permitted to shift the same to another bonded warehouse where the rental liability would be lesser.

3. Bearing in mind the aforesaid issues which stand raised, the Court is of the considered opinion that the ends of justice would warrant the Deputy Commissioner being called upon to dispose of the pending representations with expedition and preferably within a period of three weeks from today. All contentions of respective parties on merit are kept open.

4. The writ petition shall stand disposed of.

YASHWANT VARMA, J.

NOVEMBER 14, 2022 / SU Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:NEHA Signing Date:16.11.2022 13:19:59