https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=287630 Statutory vesting of a national highway in the Union for control and management did not divest the State of ownership or its power to levy tolls, and the State toll law was not impliedly repealed. The levy was characterised as a toll and therefore a tax, not a fee, so no quid pro quo or special service was required. It was also held not to restrain inter-State trade or commerce, and Articles 301 and 304 were not violated. The State's toll levy on use of the road was upheld as a valid exercise of taxing power. en-us Mon, 02 Sep 1968 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 23 Apr 2020 13:39:52 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=287630 Statutory vesting of a national highway in the Union for control and management did not divest the State of ownership or its power to levy tolls, and the State toll law was not impliedly repealed. The levy was characterised as a toll and therefore a tax, not a fee, so no quid pro quo or special service was required. It was also held not to restrain inter-State trade or commerce, and Articles 301 and 304 were not violated. The State's toll levy on use of the road was upheld as a valid exercise of taxing power. Case-Laws Indian Laws Mon, 02 Sep 1968 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=287630