Madhya Pradesh High Court: Victims Must be Given a Hearing Even Before Closure Report Rejection || Delhi HC: Payment of ‘Pagri’ Does Not Render Tenancy Non-Terminable, Allowing Eviction || Ker HC Examined Whether Electro-Homeopathy Can be Practised Without Registration under Medical Laws || Delhi HC: Better Possessory Title Holder Can Recover Property From Occupant Without Superior Right || Bombay High Court: Compensatory Afforestation Must Be in Same or Nearby Locality For Residents || Bombay High Court Protects ‘MEFTAL-SPAS’, Restrains Use of Similar Drug Brand || Supreme Court: Inclusion in Revised Select List Does Not Give TN MV Inspectors a Vested Right || Bombay HC: ICC Cannot Hear Sexual Harassment Complaint over Non-Employer Transport Incident || Ker HC Upholds Rule that Homeopathic Doctors Must Cancel Registration Before Enrolment as Advocates || J&K&L HC: Evidence Negating Penetration Warrants Conviction For Attempt to Rape, Not Rape

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 :