https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=278702 Petitioners had locus standi to challenge an excise policy and amended licensing rules because their commercial interests could be affected by a single wholesale licence. The Financial Commissioner's rule-making power was held wide enough to prescribe the number of wholesale licences for the State as a whole, and the statutory scheme did not confine that power to local areas. A policy providing for one L-1BF wholesale licence was not illegal or arbitrary where it served revenue, anti-cartel, and anti-illicit trade objectives, was not shown to be mala fide or discriminatory, and was open to eligible bidders. The single licence policy and amended rule were upheld. en-us Fri, 26 May 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 18 Feb 2019 06:31:38 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=278702 Petitioners had locus standi to challenge an excise policy and amended licensing rules because their commercial interests could be affected by a single wholesale licence. The Financial Commissioner's rule-making power was held wide enough to prescribe the number of wholesale licences for the State as a whole, and the statutory scheme did not confine that power to local areas. A policy providing for one L-1BF wholesale licence was not illegal or arbitrary where it served revenue, anti-cartel, and anti-illicit trade objectives, was not shown to be mala fide or discriminatory, and was open to eligible bidders. The single licence policy and amended rule were upheld. Case-Laws Companies Law Fri, 26 May 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=278702