SC: Confirmation of an Auction Sale Does Not Bar Judicial Scrutiny of Reserve Price Valuation || Supreme Court Sets Aside Conviction of Four Men in a 1998 Gang Rape Case || Supreme Court: Privy Purse Privileges of Princely Rulers are Not Enforceable Legal Rights || Delhi HC: Repeated Court Summons May Distress and Re-Traumatize Child Sexual Assault Victims || Jammu and Kashmir High Court: Labeling Someone as a Terrorist Associate Amounts to Defamation || Delhi HC: Setting Aside or Altering a Judge’s Order by a Higher Court Doesn’t Affect Their Integrity || Delhi High Court: Accused Cannot be Faulted For Smart Replies; Interrogator Must be Sharper || Supreme Court: Belated Jurisdictional Challenge Impermissible After Participation in Arbitration || Supreme Court: Failure to Prove Specific Overt Acts of Each Unlawful Assembly Member Not Fatal || Supreme Court: Parental Salary Alone Cannot Determine OBC Creamy Layer Status

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 :