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    

K.C.P. Ltd. v. Government of A.P. and Ors. - (Supreme Court) (12 Aug 2015)

Collection of fee for preventing illegal activities of unrelated third parties a gambit for preventing manufacturers from exporting industrial alcohol

MANU/SC/0855/2015

Excise

Duty payable for grant of permit to export rectified spirit from the state, favouring buyers of rectified spirit in the state, is a tax not a fee. From that inference, the Supreme Court iterated that a duty, with the requirement of an indemnity bond, seeking to regulate, control and discourage export was ultra vires the state's jurisdiction. The Court, however, refrained from striking down the Andhra Pradesh Rectified Spirits Rules, 1971 in their entirety, given the need for preventing the illegal conversion of industrial alcohol to potable alcohol.

Relevant : Synthetics and Chemicals Limited v. State of UP MANU/SC/0595/1989

Tags : EXCISE   RECTIFIED ALCOHOL   DISCOURAGE EXPORT  

Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2026 - All Rights Reserved