Supreme Court: Rape Conviction Possible Without S.376 Charge if POCSO Case Fails on Age Proof  ||  SC: Mere Long Possession Can't Establish Adverse Possession; Hostile Intent is Required  ||  Supreme Court Finds Gaps in FSSAI’s Proposed Warning Labels for Foods High in Fat, Sugar and Salt  ||  Supreme Court Quashes ITS Officer's 'Deadwood' Retirement, Orders Rs. 15 Lakh Payment  ||  Uttarakhand HC: District Magistrate to Establish Public Helpline within 24 Hrs amid Water Pollution  ||  Allahabad HC: Custodial Violence and Molestation Are Crimes, Not Police Duty  ||  Gujarat High Court: Bombay Public Trust Registration is Covered by Section 43 of the Waqf Act  ||  J&K&L HC: Advocates not Above Law, No Immunity from Lawful Police Inquiry  ||  Gauhati HC: Talaq-e-Hasan Valid, Requires Registration under Assam Marriage Act  ||  NCLAT: NCLT President Empowered to Transfer Cases from One Bench to Another    

State of Tamil Nadu and Ors. v. TVL. South Indian Sugar Mills Assn. and Ors. - (Supreme Court) (12 Aug 2015)

Expenses incurred in preventing misuse of industrial alcohol will suffice for quid pro quo

MANU/SC/0853/2015

Excise

Fee and excise duty collected from an industry to prevent illegal activities which have no causal connection with that industry will 'metamorphose into a tax'. In a case where producers of industrial alcohol questioned the legality of a Re.1 per bulk litre fee charged by the state, the Court upheld the imposition of the fee. Recovery of the fee would be permissible, so long as expenses incurred by the state government are for ensuring that industrial alcohol is not used as potable alcohol.

Relevant : State of U.P. v. Vam Organic Chemicals Ltd. MANU/SC/0833/2003 B.S.E. Brokers' Forum, Bombay and Ors. v. Securities and Exchange Board of India and Ors. MANU/SC/0069/2001 Synthetics and Chemicals Ltd. v. State of U.P. MANU/SC/0595/1989

Tags : FEE   TAX   CAUSAL RELATIONSHIP   QUID PRO QUO  

Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2026 - All Rights Reserved