HINDUSTAN SUGAR MILLS LIMITED Vs. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a sequel to the judgment of this court in Synthetics and Chemicals Ltd. v. State of U. P. At SCR p. 682 it was observed:

(2.) Therefore, what Mr Anil B. Divan, learned Senior Counsel, contends is the order made by a bench of three Judges of this court in Writ Petition Nos. 7452 of 1981 and 3571 of 1982, Sachid Hussain v. State of U. P. must apply. According to him, the appellants would not be entitled to refund but at the same time they cannot be subject to liability at present.

(3.) In opposition to this, it is submitted that because of the stay granted by this court, the State could not effect recovery. No doubt, on and from 25/10/1989 the appellants may not be liable; but in view of the prospectiveoverruling in Synthetics and Chemicals the levy prior to that period is not, in any manner, affected. As a matter of fact, this court in several cases has permitted the levy of vend fee prior to 25/10/1989.