SC: Courts Must Curb Unlicensed Money Lenders; Probes Need Not Wait For New Law || SC: Gratuity May be Withheld While Criminal or Disciplinary Proceedings are Pending Against Employee || SC: Weapon Recovery Useless Without Proof Linking it to Crime under Section 27 Evidence Act || SC: Fines Also Run Concurrently When Sentences For Multiple Offences Run Concurrently || SC Dissolves 10-Year Estranged Marriage, Quashes 80+ Cases in 'Matrimonial Mahabharata' Dispute || SC: Board Resolution Signature Alone Doesn’t Prove Director’s Knowledge of Company Affairs || Raj HC: Industrial Tribunal Allowing Workman Legal Representation But Denying Employer is Unequal || Karnataka HC: Service Bonds Enforceable on Students With Subsidised Education, Not Bonded Labour || Gauhati HC: Challenge to Marks Barred by Constructive Res Judicata When Party Accepts Limited Remand || SC: Cheque Dishonour Complaint Can't be Quashed Pre-Trial if Sec 138 NI Act Conditions Met

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 :