Bombay High Court
Soma Vine Village Pvt. Ltd vs The State Of Maha. Principal Secretary ... on 31 January, 2023
Author: Neela Gokhale
Bench: G.S. Patel, Neela Gokhale
16-ASIAWP-82-2023.DOC
Gaikwad RD
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 82 OF 2023
IN
WRIT PETITION NO. 12840 OF 2022
Soma Vine Village Pvt Ltd ...Applicant
In the matter between
Soma Vine Village Pvt Ltd ...Petitioner
Versus
The State of Maharashtra, Through its Principal ...Respondents
Secretary, State Excise & Ors
Mr Rafique Dada, Senior Advocate, with Sweta Rajan & Jitendra
Motwani, i/b Economic Laws Practice, for the Applicant/
Petitioner.
Mrs PN Diwan, AGP, for the Respondent.
CORAM G.S. Patel &
Dr Neela Gokhale, JJ.
DATED: 31st January 2023 PC:-
1. The Interim Application seeks the following reliefs:
(a) issue an order or direction that, the Applicant's Product labels be approved so as to enable the Applicant to export the same on terms of payment of the appropriate applicable export fees / duty;
(b) issue an order or direction that the Applicant be Page 1 of 5 31st January 2023 16-ASIAWP-82-2023.DOC issued export pass / permit as and when required to export the Product subject to payment of appropriate applicable export fees / duty;
(c) expedite the hearing in the present Interim Application and grant an early hearing;
2. The Writ Petition itself was fled in 2022. It assails a demand notice by which the Respondent/Excise Authorities and the State Government levied a demand of 175% on the Petitioner's product, said to be 'apple wine'. According to the Respondents, because it is made from apples it is 'cider'. The latter attracts a higher duty.
3. Prayer (c) of the Interim Application more or less allows itself. The pleadings in the Petition are complete. We will take up the Petition for hearing and fnal disposal on 2nd March 2023 at 2.30 p.m.
4. In the meantime, Mr Dada draws our attention to Rule 11 of the Maharashtra Manufacture of Beer and Wine Rules 1966, framed under the Bombay Prohibition Act, 1949.
"11. Bottling and packing.--
(1) No beer or wine shall be bottled by the licensee except in the presence of the Brewery Ofcer or, as the case may be the Manufactory Ofcer or some other ofcer deputed for the purpose.
(2)(a) All bottles and packages containing Beer or Wine to be sold in the State of Maharashtra shall bear a label showing the name of the manufacturer, the name of the Beer or Wine, the place of manufacture, the alcoholic percentage, the batch number of manufacture of Beer or Page 2 of 5 31st January 2023 16-ASIAWP-82-2023.DOC Wine, the month and year of Manufacture, the statement "FOR SALE IN MAHARASHTRA STATE ONLY"
statutory warning consumption of liquor is injurious to health and maximum retail price (inclusive of all taxes and duties) Explanation.--Sales tax on beer or wine sold through FL-II Vendor's licence issued under rule 25 of the Bombay Foreign Liquor Rules, 1953, levied under Government Notifcation, Finance Department, No. STA- 1097/CR-1/ Taxation-2, dated the 8th December, 1998 is also recoverable over and above Maximum Retail Price on such beer and wine manufactured prior to the 9th December, 1998 and sold on or after the 9th December, 1998.
(b) All bottles and packages containing Beer or Wine to be sold out of the State of Maharashtra shall bear a label showing the name of manufacturer, the name of Maharashtra shall bear a label showing the name of manufacturer, the name of the Beer or Wine, the place of manufacturer, the alcoholic percentage, batch number of manufacture of Beer or Wine, the month and year of Manufacture and statement "NOT FOR SALE IN THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA" and the statutory warning consumption of liquor is injurious to health. (3) The guaranteed fuid contents of each bottles, cask or keg shall be clearly indicated in bold letters on the label. (4) All labels required to be used shall be submitted to the Commissioner for his approval. No label shall be used unless it is approved by the Commissioner. (5) The bottles to be used for the purpose of bottling beer or wine shall be new and properly hygienically cleansed and washed by an automatic bottle washing Machine. (6) Immediately after the bottles are flled up, they shall Page 3 of 5 31st January 2023 16-ASIAWP-82-2023.DOC be crown corked and labelled and removed to the fnished store room. The casks or kegs shall also be properly closed with bungs, sealed, labelled, and then removed to the fnished storeroom.
(7) The crown corks shall be metallic and shall be frmly fxed in position by a corking machine or any other suitable appliance. The crown cork shall bear the name of the manufacture.
(8) An account of the transactions in the bottling room shall be maintained in Form BR-VI.
Provided that, the BRL licensee manufacturing beer up to two lakh litres per year in a microbrewery, shall be allowed to sell the beer manufactured in an unbottled and unpackaged form in the premises for which Licence in Form E is granted under the Special Permits and Licences Rules, 1952. Sub-rules (1), (2), (3), (4), (5) and (6) of Rule 11 of the principal Rules shall not be applicable for such a BRL licensee manufacturing upto two lakhs litres of beer per year in microbrewery for sale in unbottled and unpackaged form on the premises having licence in Form E under the Special Permission and Licence Rules, 1952 or licensee granted under sub-rule (1-B) of Rule 45 of the Bombay Foreign Liquor Rules, 1953."
(Emphasis added)
5. Rule 11(2) clearly distinguishes products for export (i.e., to be sold out of the State of Maharashtra) from products to be sold within the State. The difculty, Mr Dada explains, is that unless the Petitioner's label is approved and which goes by the name 'Thirsty Fox', exports cannot be efected. He clarifes that the application relates to overseas exports, and not for sale in other parts of this country.
Page 4 of 531st January 2023 16-ASIAWP-82-2023.DOC
6. There is actually no issue regarding exports given the frame of prayers (a) and (b). The demand by the Respondents was in regard to domestic sales of the product within Maharashtra. We see no reason why exports (and exports only) should also be prohibited once the Petitioners have said in the prayer that they are willing to make the exports on terms of payment of all appropriate applicable export fees and duties. Obviously, the export is subject to the Petitioner's compliance with these requirements which cannot be waived. Mr. Dada points out that this would result in signifcant earnings in foreign exchange. We have nothing to say on that aspect of the matter.
7. Accordingly, we allow the Interim Application in terms of prayer clauses (a) and (b).
8. We clarify that this order is limited to overseas exports only and is not to be construed as a permission for domestic sales within the country under any circumstances. Mr Dada once again clarifes, on instructions, that the proposal is for export overseas and not just outside Maharashtra.
9. The Interim Application is disposed of in these terms.
(Dr Neela Gokhale, J) (G. S. Patel, J)
Digitally
signed by RAJU
DATTATRAYA
RAJU GAIKWAD
DATTATRAYA
GAIKWAD Date:
2023.02.01
13:36:24
+0530
Page 5 of 5
31st January
2023