M/S. Unistil Alcobends Private Limited Vs Excise… — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2025)

M/S. Unistil Alcobends Private Limited Vs Excise… — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Writ petition disposed of without adjudication on merits, reserving liberty to the petitioner to avail the remedy of appeal before the Karnataka Revenue Appellate Tribunal, if so advised; all contentions left open to be urged before the Tribunal; petitioner entitled to seek exclusion under Section 14 of the Limitation Act, 1963.

Issue for consideration

Whether the writ petition ought to be entertained under Article 226 of the Constitution of India despite the availability of an efficacious alternative statutory remedy under Section 61(3) of the Karnataka Excise Act, 1965 (appeal to the Karnataka Revenue Appellate Tribunal).

Ratio / Principle

An efficacious alternative statutory remedy exists under Section 61(3) of the Karnataka Excise Act, 1965, whereby a person aggrieved by an order of the Excise Commissioner may prefer an appeal before the Karnataka Revenue Appellate Tribunal within 90 days from the date of communication of such order.

Key takeaways

The petitioner has not demonstrated any exceptional circumstance justifying invocation of the extraordinary jurisdiction of the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India despite the availability of the alternative statutory remedy; the Court is therefore not inclined to entertain the writ petition.ratio¶25
In disposing of the writ petition, the petitioner is granted liberty to avail the remedy of appeal before the Tribunal; all contentions are left open to be urged before the Tribunal.ratio¶30
The petitioner is entitled to seek exclusion under Section 14 of the Limitation Act, 1963.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Excise — Writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India seeking to quash the Excise Commissioner's appellate order dated 06.12.2018 in Appeal No.ECS/43/APP/2018 (affirming the Deputy Commissioner's order dated 31.10.2017) and Respondent No.2's notice dated 12.06.2016 — Held: Section 61(3) of the Karnataka Excise Act, 1965 provides an efficacious alternative statutory remedy of appeal to the Karnataka Revenue Appellate Tribunal within 90 days of communication of the order; petitioner demonstrated no exceptional circumstance warranting exercise of Article 226 jurisdiction — Writ petition disposed of reserving liberty to appeal before the Tribunal, contentions left open, with entitlement to seek exclusion of limitation period under Section 14 of the Limitation Act, 1963. (NC: 2025:KHC:48053)

NC: 2025:KHC:48053 WP No. 8397 of 2024

1 -

HC-KAR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 20^TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA

WRIT PETITION NO. 8397 OF 2024 (EXCISE)

BETWEEN:

M/S. UNISTIL ALCOBENDS PRIVATE LIMITED, DISTILLERS AND VINTNERS, A COMPANY INCORPORATED UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT, 1956 HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT NO.139/1, 140/1, 140/2, B-M ROAD, NH-48, SOLUR, MAGADI TALUK, RAMANGARA DISTRICT-562127 REPRESENTED HEREIN BY ITS DIRECTOR, MR. DINESH MALLYA. …PETITIONER

(BY SRI RAGHAVENDRA K., ADVOCATE)

AND:

Digitally signed by MAHALAKSHMI B M Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

EXCISE COMMISSIONER IN KARNATAKA KARNATAKA STATE EXCISE DEPARTMENT, 2^ND FLOOR, TTMC – A BLOCK, BMTC BUILDING, SHANTINAGAR, BENGALURU-560027.

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF EXCISE RAMANAGARA DISTRICT, RAMANAGARA-562159.

DISTILLERY OFFICER AND SUPERINTENDENT OF EXCISE M/S. UNISTIL ALCOBLENDS PVT. LTD., SOLUR VILLAGE, MAGADI ROAD, BENGALURU-562127. …RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI RAJ KUMAR M., AGA FOR R-1 & R-2; V/O/D 02.04.2024 NOTICE TO R-3 IS D/W)

2 - NC: 2025:KHC:48053 WP No. 8397 of 2024

HC-KAR

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASHING THE ORDER DATED 06.12.2018 PASSED BY RESPONDENT NO.1 IN APPEAL NO.ECS/43/APP/2018 (ANNEXURE-A); THE NOTICE DATED 12.06.2016, BEARING NO.EXE/RNR/U.DISTILLERY/01/2015.16, ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.2 (ANNEXURE-B) AND ETC.

THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA

ORAL ORDER

The petitioner has called in question the order dated 31.10.2017 passed by the Deputy Commissioner, which has been subsequently affirmed by respondent No.1– Excise Commissioner by order dated 06.12.2018.

Under Section 61(3) of the Karnataka Excise Act, 1965 an efficacious alternative statutory remedy is provided to a person aggrieved by an order of the Excise Commissioner by preferring an appeal before the Karnataka Revenue Appellate Tribunal (‘Tribunal’ for short) within 90 days from the date of communication of such order. The petitioner has not demonstrated the existence of any exceptional circumstance that justify invoking

3 - NC: 2025:KHC:48053 WP No. 8397 of 2024

HC-KAR

extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of

the Constitution of India, despite the availability of this alternative remedy.

In the above circumstances, this Court is not inclined to entertain the writ petition. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of reserving the liberty to the petitioner to avail the remedy of appeal before the Tribunal, if so advised. All contentions are left open to be urged before the Tribunal.

The petitioner is entitled to seek exclusion

under Section 14 of the Limitation Act, 1963.

Sd/-

_____________________ JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA

AT

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 16