Calcutta HC: Demolition Orders Cannot be Challenged under Article 226 if a Statutory Appeal Exists || Kerala High Court: Disability Pension is Payable to Voluntary Dischargee For Service-Related Illness || Calcutta High Court: Partition Decree is Executable Only After Stamp Duty Payment || Calcutta HC: Contempt Court Cannot Grant New Relief Beyond Original Order Once Compliance is Met || Kerala High Court: Intentional Judicial Decisions Cannot be Altered as Clerical Errors under CPC || Supreme Court: Delay In Filing Appeals under Section 74 of 2013 Land Acquisition Act is Condonable || SC: Statutory Authorities may Intervene When Housing Societies Delay Membership Decisions || SC: Quasi-Judicial Authorities Cannot Exercise Review Powers Unless Expressly Granted By Statute || SC: Special Court Cannot Order Confiscation While Appeal Against Attachment Confirmation is Pending || SC: Photocopies are Not Evidence Unless Conditions for Leading Secondary Evidence are Proved

Kalyan Chemicals v. Government of A.P. and Ors. - (Supreme Court) (12 Aug 2015)

Larger amount of fee not excessive given passage of time

MANU/SC/0854/2015

Excise

The Supreme Court rejected the claim that collection of a gallonage fee by state at the rate of Re.1 per bulk litre was illegal, arbitrary and without justification in the non-rendering of any service. It added, the state had the authority to impose the fee retrospectively, and in its determination found Re.1 per bulk litre to be reasonable and not excessive.

Relevant : Synthetics and Chemicals Limited v. State of U.P. MANU/SC/0595/1989 Vam Organics Chemicals Ltd. v. State of U.P. MANU/SC/1076/1997

Tags : EXCISE FEE EXCESSIVE PASSAGE OF TIME

Share :