COLLECTOR OF CENTRAL EXCISE Vs. V K PALAPPA NADAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS writ appeal is filed under the Letters Patent against the decision of ramachandra Iyer J. (as he then was), in W. P. No. 590 of 1958. The prior facts, which led to the present proceedings, are briefly the following

(2.) THE petitioner in the writ petition is a dealer in scented chewing tobacco, cigars and beedies, and he had a licence for maintaining a warehouse for the storing' of tobacco. Under the rules, for the grant of such licence, the petitioner had to keep proper accounts of the stock of tobacco in the warehouse. On a check by the excise authorities, his stock was found short by a substantial quantity. This made the petitioner liable to, certain penalties, under the Central Excise Rules (1944), rule 223-A. The Collector of Central Excise called upon him to show cause, why a penalty should not be inflicted upon him for the shortage. After receiving the petitioner's explanation, the Collector found that the explanation was not satisfactory, and imposed on the petitioner a penalty in a sum exceeding a lakh of rupees, tinder Rule 223-A, of the Central Excise Rules.

(3.) SECTION 35 of the Central Excises and salt act (Central Act I of 1944) gave the petitioner a right or appeal to the Central Board of Revenue, which he availed himself of, and thereafter, the Central Board of Revenue passed an order on his appeal to the following effect: