TMI Blog1996 (1) TMI 453X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in Writ Petition (C) No. 8354 of 1981 challenge the levy of a licence fee for bottling of liquor under the U.P. Bottling of Foreign Liquor Rules, 1969 and the subsequent amendment of the Rules under a notification dated 10-7-1975, issued by the Office of the Excise Commissioner, Uttar Pradesh bearing No. 1138/IX-213-C. These Rules are framed under the U.P. Excise Act, 1910. 3. The appellants su ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... both, and of selling by retail any liquor or intoxicating drug within any local area. The activity of bottling is an integral part of the activity of manufacture and supply of such liquor. In fact, a very similar provision in the Karnataka Excise Act, 1965 has been interpreted by this Court in the case of Khoday Distilleries Ltd. v. State of Karnataka, as covering all activities which regulate th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ellants/petitioners, bottling is done as a part of the manufacturing activity. Since they already possessed a manufacturing licence, and since a duty of excise is levied on the liquor manufactured, an additional fee for a bottling licence should not be imposed. This argument also has no merit. Bottling is a distinct activity for which a licence is required under the provisions of the U.P. Bottling ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
