NCLAT: Corporate Debtor’s Guarantor Liability Unchanged Despite Internal Adjustments Among Creditors || NCLAT: Plea under IBC Section 7 Can't Be Restored After Corporate Debtor Pays Principal & Interest || Delhi HC: Wife Can Be Denied Maintenance If She Fails To Submit Latest Salary Slips || Kerala HC: Income of Parent Who Abandoned Family Shouldn’t Count For EWS Reservation Eligibility || Gujarat HC: Writ Courts Interfering in Arbitral Procedure Orders Defies A&C Act’s Purpose || Delhi HC: Plaintiff Doesn’t Have Vested Right to File Rejoinder under CPC || J&K&L HC: Name Change Is Fundamental Right; Boards Must Consider Legal Documents, Not Reject Request || SC: Administrative Delays by State Agencies Must Not Be Condoned || Sc: When Sale Deed Is Void, Possession Suit Follows 12-Year Limitation under Article 65, Not Art 59 || SC: Preliminary Inquiry Report Can’t Stop Court from Directing FIR Registration

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 :