https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=168230 The amount paid for an exclusive licence to vend foreign liquor was treated as consideration for the State's parting with its exclusive privilege, not as a constitutional fee, tax, duty or cess. Applying the distinction between a levy for services and the price of a privilege, the Court held that the challenge to the levy failed. The Uttar Pradesh Excise (Amendment) Ordinance, 1972 and the Excise (Amendment) Rules, 1972 were also held to be within State legislative competence, because regulation of intoxicating liquors falls within the State's control and the measures were supported by that power. The invalidation by the High Court was therefore set aside. en-us Tue, 07 Sep 1993 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 04 Feb 2015 17:42:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=168230 The amount paid for an exclusive licence to vend foreign liquor was treated as consideration for the State's parting with its exclusive privilege, not as a constitutional fee, tax, duty or cess. Applying the distinction between a levy for services and the price of a privilege, the Court held that the challenge to the levy failed. The Uttar Pradesh Excise (Amendment) Ordinance, 1972 and the Excise (Amendment) Rules, 1972 were also held to be within State legislative competence, because regulation of intoxicating liquors falls within the State's control and the measures were supported by that power. The invalidation by the High Court was therefore set aside. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 07 Sep 1993 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=168230