High CourtsSingle Bench

Prahlad Singh vs Excise Commissioner, Uttarakhand, Dehradun And Others

Uttarakhand High Court · Decided on 23 November 2021 · Citation: (2021) 11 UK CK 0114

HON’BLE JUDGES
Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Uttar Pradesh Excise Act, 1910 — Section 11(1)
RESULT
Disposed Of
CASE NUMBER
Writ Petition (M/S) No. 2436 Of 2021
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

6 paragraphs · 174 words

Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J

1.

Petitioner was granted licence for retail sale of country-made liquor, during financial year 2020-21. Since petitioner could not deposit the required revenue with the Excise Department, therefore, his licence was given to someone else. Thereafter, a recovery certificate was issued against the petitioner for recovery of Rs. 13,41,946/-, as shortfall of revenue payable to the Excise Department.

2.

It is the contention of learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner has filed an appeal under Section 11 (1) of the Excise Act, 1910, which is pending before the Excise Commissioner.

3.

In the writ petition, petitioner has challenged the recovery citation issued by Tehsildar Salt, Almora for recovery of Rs. 13,41,946/-.

4.

Since petitioner's appeal is pending before the Excise Commissioner, therefore, the writ petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to approach the Excise Commissioner for expediting disposal of the pending appeal.

5.

For a period of four weeks from today, no coercive measures shall be taken against the petitioner pursuant to the impugned recovery citation.