Supreme Court: Compassionate Appointees Cannot Later Claim Entitlement to a Higher Post || NCLAT New Delhi: Insolvency Pleas Cannot Be Admitted When Information Utility Records Show a Dispute || NCLAT: Issuing Cheques For Another Entity’s Liabilities Does not Constitute Operational Debt || NCLAT: SEBI Penalties Imposed After Liquidation Begins are Not Admissible as Claims || NCLT Reiterates That an Auction Purchaser is Not Liable For a Corporate Debtor’s Electricity Dues || Delhi HC Upholds Interim Injunction Against 'Power Flex' in Bata’s Trademark Infringement Case || Calcutta High Court: Mere Presence of Alcohol in Post-Mortem Cannot Bar Compensation to Heirs || Kerala High Court: Review Petition Cannot Be Entertained Against an Order Refusing Arbitration || J&K High Court: Umadevi Judgment Does not Justify Perpetual Temporary Employment || SC: Public Premises Act Prevails over State Rent Laws For Evicting Unauthorised Occupants

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 :