<p>The Supreme Court on Tuesday declined to intervene into revoking of licence of a company, that offered mobile wallet services, for sale of liquor in absence of any provision for it under the Karnataka Excise Act.</p>.<p>“You want restraint order against the state from interfering in your business of liquor. You come into picture before sale of liquor. You are becoming a party to the sale. You are facilitating indirectly to the sale of liquor,” a bench of Justices A M Khanwilkar and Dinesh Maheshwari asked senior advocate Neeraj Kishan Kaul, representing a Chennai-based company - Hip Bar Pvt Ltd.</p>.<p><strong>READ: <a href="https://www.deccanherald.com/business/business-news/mobile-wallet-company-moves-sc-against-revocation-of-licence-for-liquor-sale-809319.html" target="_blank">Mobile wallet company moves SC against revocation of licence for liquor sale</a></strong></p>.<p>The counsel, for his part, contended that the company was not into sale of liquor. The company was created post-demonetisation to promote digital payment. A person who used the mobile wallet is given a QR code which can be used for buying liquor, he said.</p>.<p>“I am like a taxi which is carrying the consumer to a liquor shop. E-wallet payment is not sale and purchase. The state can anyway monitor it,” the counsel submitted.</p>.<p>The bench, however, said the company was becoming a party to the sale of liquor which was regulated.</p>.<p>“There has to be some provision for licence for it,” the bench said.</p>.<p>The bench said it was not inclined into the division bench's order refusing any interim relief to the company. So, the counsel sought a permission to withdraw the petition. Allowing this, the court also said the Karnataka High Court should consider expeditious disposal of a pending writ appeal in the matter.</p>.<p>On a request by the counsel, the bench also clarified that its order would not come in the way of the company to make a representation for licence, which would be considered on its own merit.</p>.<p>Hip Bar had contended before the HC that the licence issued by the state government under the Food and Safety Standards Act provided for carrying on with the business of distributor, supplier and transporter with regard to ready-to-eat savouries and beverages, excluding dairy products.</p>.<p>A letter of authority was issued on August 01, 2017 by the commissioner, Excise Department, for online order processing and delivery of Indian and foreign liquor including beer, wine and LAB (Low Alcoholic Beverages) to Hip Bar with certain conditions.</p>.<p>The company claimed the letter was withdrawn abruptly without providing an opportunity to show cause after a Kannada News channel carried a report against the company and liquor mafia made a complaint against it.</p>
<p>The Supreme Court on Tuesday declined to intervene into revoking of licence of a company, that offered mobile wallet services, for sale of liquor in absence of any provision for it under the Karnataka Excise Act.</p>.<p>“You want restraint order against the state from interfering in your business of liquor. You come into picture before sale of liquor. You are becoming a party to the sale. You are facilitating indirectly to the sale of liquor,” a bench of Justices A M Khanwilkar and Dinesh Maheshwari asked senior advocate Neeraj Kishan Kaul, representing a Chennai-based company - Hip Bar Pvt Ltd.</p>.<p><strong>READ: <a href="https://www.deccanherald.com/business/business-news/mobile-wallet-company-moves-sc-against-revocation-of-licence-for-liquor-sale-809319.html" target="_blank">Mobile wallet company moves SC against revocation of licence for liquor sale</a></strong></p>.<p>The counsel, for his part, contended that the company was not into sale of liquor. The company was created post-demonetisation to promote digital payment. A person who used the mobile wallet is given a QR code which can be used for buying liquor, he said.</p>.<p>“I am like a taxi which is carrying the consumer to a liquor shop. E-wallet payment is not sale and purchase. The state can anyway monitor it,” the counsel submitted.</p>.<p>The bench, however, said the company was becoming a party to the sale of liquor which was regulated.</p>.<p>“There has to be some provision for licence for it,” the bench said.</p>.<p>The bench said it was not inclined into the division bench's order refusing any interim relief to the company. So, the counsel sought a permission to withdraw the petition. Allowing this, the court also said the Karnataka High Court should consider expeditious disposal of a pending writ appeal in the matter.</p>.<p>On a request by the counsel, the bench also clarified that its order would not come in the way of the company to make a representation for licence, which would be considered on its own merit.</p>.<p>Hip Bar had contended before the HC that the licence issued by the state government under the Food and Safety Standards Act provided for carrying on with the business of distributor, supplier and transporter with regard to ready-to-eat savouries and beverages, excluding dairy products.</p>.<p>A letter of authority was issued on August 01, 2017 by the commissioner, Excise Department, for online order processing and delivery of Indian and foreign liquor including beer, wine and LAB (Low Alcoholic Beverages) to Hip Bar with certain conditions.</p>.<p>The company claimed the letter was withdrawn abruptly without providing an opportunity to show cause after a Kannada News channel carried a report against the company and liquor mafia made a complaint against it.</p>
