Delhi HC: MYAS Not Bound to ‘Rubber-Stamp’ International Federation Choices || AP HC: Fulfilling Rehabilitation Promises to Displaced is State’s Constitutional Obligation || SC: Career Progression to Higher Echelons of Judiciary is Neither a Matter of Right Nor Entitlement || Provisions of Tribunal Reforms Act 2022 Struck Down as Unconstitutional || Madras HC: Repeated Remand Orders U/S 37 A&C Act are Unworkable Without Reversing Merits || Delhi High Court: Unproven Immoral Conduct of a Parent Cannot Influence Child Custody Decisions || Delhi High Court: Counsel Cannot Treat Passovers or Adjournments as an Automatic Right || Delhi HC: Landlord’s Rent Control Act Rights Cannot be Waived by Contract With Tenant || Bom HC: Arbitrator Who Halts Proceedings over Unpaid Revised Fees Effectively Withdraws From Office || SC Holds That if Some Offences Are Quashed On Compromise, The FIR Cannot Continue For Others

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 :