SC: Consumers Cannot Bear Power Plant Depreciation Costs When No Electricity Was Supplied || Supreme Court: Para-Teachers’ Regularisation Depends On Educational Standards Set By States || Bombay High Court: State Cannot Withhold Aid to Child Homes While Supporting Ladki Bahin Yojana || Delhi High Court: Husband Cannot Seek to Strike off Wife’s Defence over Unpaid Litigation Costs || Calcutta HC: Bank Accounts Cannot Be Frozen Solely on Complaints Filed Via MHA Cybercrime Portal || J&K&L HC: Unregistered Agreement to Sell Can be Considered For Assessing Possession at Interim Stage || Raj HC: Cybercrime Cases Can't be Quashed Only on Compromise as They Impact Society at Large || Gujarat High Court: Separate Compensation is Payable For Stillborn Child in Railway Accident Case || Delhi HC: Hymen Rupture is Not Required to Prove Penetrative Sexual Assault under the POCSO Act || Delhi HC: Organised Crime Groups Exploit Juveniles, Misuse Juvenile Justice Laws for Serious Crimes

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 :