Raj HC: Convicted Minor Gang Rapist Not Fully Barred From Open-Air Camps; Rules Allow Exceptions || Calcutta High Court: Serving a Show-Cause Notice Via Email is Valid under PMLA Regulations || Del HC: Candidate’s Independent Medical Opinions Don’t Justify Fresh Medical Exam in SSC Recruitment || Calcutta HC: Magistrate Must Assess Grounds, Cannot Order Police Inquiry under Section 175(3) BNSS || SC Grants Law Officer Exam Relief, Saying Students Can’t be Blamed When Judges Differ in Views || SC: Fraudulent Diversion of Company Funds Cannot be Validated by Later Shareholder Ratification || SC: Doctor’s View on a Victim’s Consciousness Prevails over Police Assessment in Dying Declarations || SC: Examining Contradictions and Witness Credibility Exceeds the Scope of Section 319 CrPC || Supreme Court Struck Down Section 60(4), Removing Limits on Maternity Benefits For Adoptive Mothers || Supreme Court: Air Force Group Insurance Society qualifies as ‘State’ under Article 12

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 :