Allahabad HC: Victim Compensation under POCSO Act Cannot be Withheld For Lack of Injury Report || MP HC: Diverting Goods From Delivery Point is Misappropriation under S.407 IPC || Delhi HC: Bar Associations are Not ‘State’ under Article 12 as They Do Not Perform Public Functions || Delhi HC: Pending Probate Proceedings Do Not Prevent Filing FIR For Alleged Will Forgery || Ker HC: Dismissal For Default Alone Cannot Justify Rejecting Restoration Plea For Lack of Vigilance || SC: Disclosure Statements Alone Cannot Secure Conviction Without a Complete Chain of Evidence || Supreme Court Orders Reporting of Student Suicides and Bans Denial of Classes or Exams || SC: Govt Can Exclude Overqualified Candidates From Posts Requiring Lower Qualifications || SC: Contracts to Hire Global Speakers For Media Summits are Not Taxable as Event Management Services || SC: Mandatory Injunction Suit Alone is Not Maintainable When Plaintiff’s Title is Disputed

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 :