TaxTMI Login
AI OCR ✕Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →Just a moment...
AI OCR ✕Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: (i) Whether the order refusing refund could be sustained when it was unsupported by reasons and the refund amount had already been deposited in the tax proceedings. (ii) Whether the interest awarded on the delayed refund required interference.
Issue (i): Whether the order refusing refund could be sustained when it was unsupported by reasons and the refund amount had already been deposited in the tax proceedings.
Analysis: The challenge concerned rejection of the refund application after the assessment order had been quashed and the matter remanded. The refusal to refund was found to be unjustified, and the absence of reasons in the impugned decision supported the grant of refund. The principal amount had already been returned, so the dispute was confined to interest on the delayed refund.
Conclusion: The refusal to withhold the refund was not disturbed, and the respondent was entitled to relief on the refund issue.
Issue (ii): Whether the interest awarded on the delayed refund required interference.
Analysis: The High Court had directed interest at 12% for the first month of delay and 18% per annum thereafter. The modification made was limited to the rate of interest, and the award was confined to 12% per annum for the entire period of delay.
Conclusion: The interest was reduced and confined to 12% per annum for the whole period.
Final Conclusion: The appeal failed, and the refund-related relief in favour of the respondent was maintained with the interest obligation modified downward.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
