https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=175795 A levy imposed on renewal of a money-lender's licence was upheld as a regulatory fee because it funded inspection of accounts and verification of compliance under a welfare statute. Strict quid pro quo was not required; a reasonable nexus between the fee and the regulatory burden was sufficient. The levy was not converted into a tax merely because it was measured by maximum capital, credited to the general fund, or not uniform. The challenge failed because there was no material showing the levy was excessive or disproportionate to the supervisory infrastructure required. en-us Thu, 16 Dec 2004 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 07 Dec 2015 19:20:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=175795 A levy imposed on renewal of a money-lender's licence was upheld as a regulatory fee because it funded inspection of accounts and verification of compliance under a welfare statute. Strict quid pro quo was not required; a reasonable nexus between the fee and the regulatory burden was sufficient. The levy was not converted into a tax merely because it was measured by maximum capital, credited to the general fund, or not uniform. The challenge failed because there was no material showing the levy was excessive or disproportionate to the supervisory infrastructure required. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 16 Dec 2004 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=175795