Delhi HC: Workman Cannot Claim Section 17(B) of the ID Act Wages after Reaching Superannuation Age || Allahabad HC: Caste by Birth Remains Unchanged Despite Conversion or Inter-Caste Marriage || Delhi High Court: Tweeting Corruption Allegations Against Employer Can Constitute Misconduct || Delhi High Court: State Gratuity Authorities Lack Jurisdiction over Multi-State Establishments || Kerala High Court: Arrest Grounds Need Not Mention Contraband Quantity When No Seizure is Made || SC: Silence During Investigation Does Not Ipso Facto Mean Non-Cooperation to Deny Bail || Supreme Court: High Courts Cannot Re-Examine Answer Keys Even in Judicial Service Exams || SC: Central Government Employees under CCS Rules are Not Covered by the Payment of Gratuity Act || Supreme Court Holds CrPC Principles on Discharge and Framing of Charges Continue under BNSS || Supreme Court: High Courts Must Independently Assess SC/ST Act Charges in Section 14A Appeals

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 :