https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=180480 A complaint challenging revised siding charges was treated as wide enough to cover the later maintenance, haulage and interest components because the pleadings, amendments and evidence showed that the reasonableness of the increase was in issue and the opposing party was not prejudiced. Section 41(1)(c) of the Indian Railways Act, read with sections 29(1) and 29(2), was construed to permit scrutiny of any unreasonable railway charge. On the facts, the assisted siding did not involve a special or extra service justifying an additional levy, so the haulage charge was found unjustified and the tribunal's order was sustained. en-us Fri, 13 Dec 1968 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 26 Mar 2016 10:18:51 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=180480 A complaint challenging revised siding charges was treated as wide enough to cover the later maintenance, haulage and interest components because the pleadings, amendments and evidence showed that the reasonableness of the increase was in issue and the opposing party was not prejudiced. Section 41(1)(c) of the Indian Railways Act, read with sections 29(1) and 29(2), was construed to permit scrutiny of any unreasonable railway charge. On the facts, the assisted siding did not involve a special or extra service justifying an additional levy, so the haulage charge was found unjustified and the tribunal's order was sustained. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 13 Dec 1968 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=180480