Bombay HC: Insolvency Cannot be Used to Evade a Family Court’s Maintenance Order || Kerala HC: Forklifts and Factory Cranes Are Motor Vehicles and Must be Registered under MV Act || Guj HC: Edible Crude Palm Kernel Oil Qualifies for Duty Exemption; End-Use Condition not Applicable || NCLAT Delhi: Advance under Land-Development MoU is not Financial Debt and Cannot Trigger CIRP || NCLAT: NCLT Cannot Change Capital Structure of a Legally Compliant Successful Auction Purchaser || Supreme Court: Endless Investigation and Long Delay in Filing Chargesheet Can Justify Quashing Case || SC: Landowners Accepting Compensation Settlements Cannot Later Claim Statutory Benefits || Supreme Court: Provident Fund Dues Have Priority over a Bank’s Claim under the SARFAESI Act || Supreme Court: Indian Courts Cannot Appoint Arbitrators for Arbitrations Seated Outside India || Madras HC: Police Superintendent not Liable For IO’s Delay In Filing Chargesheet or Closure Report

Kalyan Chemicals v. Government of A.P. and Ors. - (Supreme Court) (12 Aug 2015)

Reasonableness of fee depends on facts of case and appreciation of previous fee with 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 :