State of Madhya Pradesh & Ors. v. Som Distillery Pvt. Ltd.

What happened

Liquor stock was destroyed by fire. The State sought about ₹38.41 lakh excise duty, but the Board of Revenue accepted evidence of an accidental electrical short circuit and granted the statutory relief for unavoidable loss.

Questions before the court

• Could a writ court reweigh the Board’s fact findings and impose duty in the absence of contrary evidence of negligence or deliberate loss?

Why the court ruled this way

The Board’s assessment was supported by the record. Revenue offered no material establishing breach of safety requirements or other avoidable cause, so judicial review could not substitute a different factual view.

Controlling point

The Board’s assessment was supported by the record. Revenue offered no material establishing breach of safety requirements or other avoidable cause, so judicial review could not substitute a different factual view.

Order and next steps

State writ petition dismissed; Board’s order cancelling the demand remained effective.

Practical implications

The operative result is case-specific: State writ petition dismissed; Board’s order cancelling the demand remained effective. Apply it within the court’s stated limit: The exemption depends on proof of unavoidable loss; negligent or inadequately documented destruction may be treated differently.

Limits of this ruling

• The exemption depends on proof of unavoidable loss; negligent or inadequately documented destruction may be treated differently.