Supreme Court: Issues of Party Capacity and Maintainability Must Be Decided by Arbitral Tribunal || Supreme Court: Omissions in Chief Examination Can Be Rectified During Cross-Examination || Supreme Court: Items Given by Accused to Police Are Not Section 27 Recoveries under Evidence Act || Gujarat High Court: Waqf Institutions Must Pay Court Fees When Filing Disputes in State Tribunal || Allahabad High Court: Law Treats All Equally, State Cannot Gain Undue Benefit from Delay Condonation || SC: SARFAESI Act Was Not Applicable in Nagaland Before its 2021 Adoption, Dismisses Creditor’s Plea || SC: Lis Pendens Applies To Money Suits on Mortgaged Property, Including Ex Parte Proceedings || Kerala HC: Civil Courts Cannot Grant Injunctions in NCLT Matters and Such Orders Can Be Set Aside || Bombay High Court: Technical Breaks to Temporary Employees Cannot Deny Maternity Leave Benefits || NCLAT: Appellate Jurisdiction Limited to Orders Deciding Parties’ Rights, Not Procedural Directions

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 :