https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=47464 A State may regulate medicinal and toilet preparations containing alcohol as intoxicants under its excise and public-health powers when the law is, in substance, directed to use, possession and transport as alcoholic beverages. That regulatory field is distinct from the Central laws governing excise duty on medicinal preparations and manufacture or sale of drugs, so incidental overlap does not defeat competence. A levy imposed for licensing and supervision of such control is a valid regulatory fee and does not require strict quid pro quo; as a regulatory charge, it does not violate Article 301. Selective regulation of Ayurvedic preparations, while excluding Unani preparations at an initial stage, was upheld as a reasonable classification with a rational nexus to the regulatory objective. en-us Tue, 11 Jan 2005 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 30 Mar 2015 18:00:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=47464 A State may regulate medicinal and toilet preparations containing alcohol as intoxicants under its excise and public-health powers when the law is, in substance, directed to use, possession and transport as alcoholic beverages. That regulatory field is distinct from the Central laws governing excise duty on medicinal preparations and manufacture or sale of drugs, so incidental overlap does not defeat competence. A levy imposed for licensing and supervision of such control is a valid regulatory fee and does not require strict quid pro quo; as a regulatory charge, it does not violate Article 301. Selective regulation of Ayurvedic preparations, while excluding Unani preparations at an initial stage, was upheld as a reasonable classification with a rational nexus to the regulatory objective. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 11 Jan 2005 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=47464