SC: Menstrual Health is a Fundamental Right under Article 21; Orders Free Sanitary Pads in Schools || Supreme Court: Industrial Court is the Proper Forum to Decide Issues Relating to Contract Labour || Supreme Court: Only Civil Court of Original Jurisdiction Can Extend Arbitral Tribunal’s Mandate || SC: Demolition of Private Property Must Rest on Clear Statutory Grounds and Due Consideration || SC: After Complaint Was Withdrawn, BCI Disciplinary Committee Could Not Penalise Advocate || MP HC: Decree Holder Cannot Defeat Compromise or Initiate Execution by Refusing Debtor’s Cheque || MP HC: Spouse’s Income Cannot Be Clubbed With Public Servant’s for Disproportionate Assets Case || Ker HC: Bar Association is Not Employer & Cannot Form Internal Complaints Committee under POSH Act || SC: Ex-Contract Workers Must Be Preferred When Employers Replace Contract Labour With Regular Staff || SC: Waqf Tribunals Cannot Hear Claims over Properties Not Listed or Registered under Waqf Act

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 :