Supreme Court: Police May Freeze Bank Accounts under S.102 CrPC in Prevention of Corruption Cases || SC: Arbitrator’s Mandate Ends on Time Expiry; Substituted Arbitrator Must Continue After Extension || SC: Woman May Move Her Department’s ICC For Harassment by Employee of Another Workplace || SC: Women’s Representation Requirement Applies to All Bar Associations in Gujarat || SC: Contempt Power isn’t Judges’ Personal Shield nor a Tool to Silence Legitimate Criticism || SC: Statutory Corporation Can Deduct under S.36(1)(viii) Only for Income from Long-Term Finance || NCLT Kolkata: Costs for Compromise or Arrangement Scheme not Part of Liquidation Expenses || NCLT Ahmedabad: Complaints Against Auditors or Company Secretaries Not Grounds for Company Probe || SC: NCLT Can Forfeit Entire Deposit if Purchaser Defaults on Payment for Liquidation Assets || Meghalaya HC: Non-Signatory or Non-Existent LLP Cannot Claim Arbitration via Group of Companies

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 :