https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=353179 A levy imposed on airport ground handling agencies was held to be amenable to writ scrutiny because the airport operator performed statutory functions and could not exclude Article 226 review by characterising the charge as contractual. The levy was valid in principle only to the extent it was traceable to the airport statute, but the demanded rates were unlawful for periods before the agency's acceptance of 2% from 4 October 1995 and before the Board's 26 December 2001 decision supporting 11%; the 10% and 15% rates were upheld for the relevant periods. Refund was confined to excess amounts not passed on, subject to unjust enrichment. en-us Fri, 22 Dec 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 29 Dec 2017 08:30:01 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=353179 A levy imposed on airport ground handling agencies was held to be amenable to writ scrutiny because the airport operator performed statutory functions and could not exclude Article 226 review by characterising the charge as contractual. The levy was valid in principle only to the extent it was traceable to the airport statute, but the demanded rates were unlawful for periods before the agency's acceptance of 2% from 4 October 1995 and before the Board's 26 December 2001 decision supporting 11%; the 10% and 15% rates were upheld for the relevant periods. Refund was confined to excess amounts not passed on, subject to unjust enrichment. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 22 Dec 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=353179