STATE OF KERALA . vs MAHARASHTRA DISTILLERIES LTD. . — C.A. No. 2249 - 2257/2000
Case under Section XI-B. Status: Disposed.
CNR: SCIN010015682000
Filing Date
25-Jan-2000
Registration No
C.A. No. 2249 - 2257/2000
Diary Number
1568/2000
Order Date
06-May-2005
Document Type
Judgment - of Main Case
Disposal Type
Dismissed
Last updated 30-May-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.STATE OF KERALA .
Adv. K. R. SASIPRABHU
Respondent(s)
-
1.MAHARASHTRA DISTILLERIES LTD. .
Adv. E. M. S. ANAM
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
06-May-2005
Judgment - of Main CaseView PDF
-
14-Oct-2004
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
20-Jul-2004
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
16-Jul-2004
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
23-Jan-2004
ROPView PDF
-
05-Dec-2003
ROPView PDF
-
06-Oct-2003
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
26-Sep-2003
ROPView PDF
-
12-Sep-2003
ROPView PDF
-
25-Aug-2003
ROPView PDF
-
11-Aug-2003
ROPView PDF
-
28-Jul-2003
ROPView PDF
-
28-Apr-2003
ROPView PDF
-
31-Mar-2003
ROPView PDF
-
03-Mar-2003
ROPView PDF
-
03-Feb-2003
ROPView PDF
-
27-Jan-2003
ROPView PDF
-
07-Jan-2003
ROPView PDF
-
19-Aug-2002
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
10-Oct-2001
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
25-Jan-2000
Case filed
Registration No. C.A. No. 2249 - 2257/2000
Summary: State of Kerala v. Maharashtra Distilleries Ltd. (C.A. No. 002249-002257/2000) Court's Decision: The Supreme Court held that excise duty paid by Kerala State Beverages Corporation (KSBC) on Indian Made Foreign Liquor (IMFL) manufactured by distillers must be included in the distillers' turnover for sales tax purposes, but only from January 5, 1999 onwards—when rules were amended requiring KSBC to pay duty before purchasing liquor from manufacturers. Key Reasoning: The Court found that the levy under Kerala's Abkari Act was not strictly excise duty on manufacture, but rather a "privilege price" paid by KSBC for the State's exclusive wholesale monopoly. Before January 5, 1999, manufacturers were correctly excluded from paying this. However, post-amendment, when KSBC paid duty directly to manufacturers as part of the purchase consideration, such amounts became part of manufacturers' taxable turnover and remained includable even under the subsequently amended Section 5(2C) of the Sales Tax Act. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts