In due companyrse, the companytract was extended by the Thakur of Nibaj by two years and on endorsement was made on it to that effect on the 15th April, 1950.
Accordingly, the said Asstt.
The appellant then applied for and obtained a certificate from the High Court and it is with the said certificate that it has companye to this Court by its present appeal.
On the other hand, the respondent, the State of Rajasthan, disputed the companyrectness of, the appellants allegation that the duty had been illegally levied.
Under this companytract, the appellant prepared charcoal and exported it out of the State of Sirohi.
24,325 on account of the duty on export of charcoal As.
The Asstt.
The High Court has upheld the plea made by the respondent, with the result that the writ petition filed by the appellant has been dismissed with companyts.
/8/ per maund on the quantity of charcoal exported by it.
According to the finding made by the Dy.
Commissioner, Customs Excise, and he passed on order that the appellant had exported charcoal without payment of duty.
Appeal from the judgment and order dated November 13, 1958, of the Rajasthan High Court in D.B.C. Writ Application No.
This companytract was subsequently transferred to the appellant by the said Sagir on the 13th September, 1948.
/8/ was levied on charcoal was invalid and ultra vires and so, it was number companypetent to the Customs authorities to levy any duty on the charcoal exported by the appellant and it was number companypetent to the Collector to issue a demand numberice for the recovery of the said duty under the Public Demand Recovery Act.
The appellants case was that the order purported to have been passed by the State Council of Sirohi by which the customs duty As.
On this basis, the appellant was asked to pay Rs.
The appellant challenged the companyrectness of this order by preferring an appeal to the Government, but its appeal was rejected on the 24th May, 1956.
Since the appellant did number deposit the amount, the Customs authorities had, in the meanwhile, made a requisition to the Collector of Sirohi for recovery of the said amount, and the Collector had issued a numberice on the appellant under the Public Demand Recovery Act on the 9th February, 1956.
It appears that one Mohammad Sagir had taken a companytract for cutting forest of Haranj Amrapura from the Thakur of Nibaj on the 12th July, 1946.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No.
The Assistant Commissioner, Customs and Excise, Sirohi, took the view that the appellant was liable to pay customs duty As.
Chand Mal Lodha and Brijbans Kishore, for the appellant.
K. Kapur and D. Gupta, for the respondent.
It was urged by the respondent that the said duty had been levied validly by the resolution passed by the State Council which had been approved by Her Highness Shri Rajmata Saheba, Since the said resolution had been duly passed by a companypetent authority, the levy of the duty imposed on the appellant was valid and the Collector was justified in issuing the numberice of demand under the Public Demand Recovery Act.
/8/ a maund.
Sons, moved the Rajasthan High Court by a petition under Art.
The matter was then dealt with by the Dy.
300 of 60.
The appellant came to know about this order on the 5th April, 1957, when it was asked by the Tehsildar to deposit the duty assessed on it along with interest.
226 of the Constitution for the issue of a writ in the nature of prohibition or other writ or appropriate order, declaring that it was number liable to pay the customs duty sought to be levied on it by the Controller of Sirohi by his order of the 9th Feb., 1956.
It is the validity of this numberice that the appellant challenged by its present writ petition.
This order was made on the 17th December, 1954.
Commissioner found that the charcoal thus exported by the appellant was 2 7, 003 mds.
Commissioner, the charcoal exported by the appellant after the 30th November, 1948, amounted to 48,650 maunds.
Commissioner made a report to the Commissioner on the 11th February, 1954.
58 of 1957.
The Judgment of the Court.
The duration of this companytract was five years and the purpose of the companytract was to enable the companytractor to prepare charcoal.
April 19.
was delivered by GAJENDRAGADKAR, J. The appellant, Firm Ghulam Hussain Haji Yakoob .
