https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=165523 A levy described as a fee must bear a general and reasonable correlation to the services rendered by the State; otherwise it may be treated as a tax rather than a fee. The Court held that compulsion does not by itself destroy the character of a fee, but a regulatory purpose or protection of State revenue is insufficient unless the material shows the cost of the services and a reasonable link to the amount collected. On the record then available, the levy under Rule III could not be upheld, and the matter was remitted so the State could adduce further evidence on quid pro quo. en-us Fri, 02 Apr 1971 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 10 Jan 2017 13:05:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=165523 A levy described as a fee must bear a general and reasonable correlation to the services rendered by the State; otherwise it may be treated as a tax rather than a fee. The Court held that compulsion does not by itself destroy the character of a fee, but a regulatory purpose or protection of State revenue is insufficient unless the material shows the cost of the services and a reasonable link to the amount collected. On the record then available, the levy under Rule III could not be upheld, and the matter was remitted so the State could adduce further evidence on quid pro quo. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 02 Apr 1971 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=165523