Ratification of resignation acceptance validates separation retrospectively, while withdrawal may be refused through reasoned administrative discretio...
Nature-dependent electricity contracts receive new Ind AS accounting, hedge designation, transition and financial-statement disclosure requirements fr...
Alternative GST remedy permitted protective writ intervention for ex parte adjudication, preserving independent appellate review of input tax credit d...
Assessment against deceased sole proprietor requires proceedings against the legal representative, rendering prior assessment and appellate orders inv...
Residential waste collection classification under SAC 999423 defeats composite-supply exemption where facilitating goods are not transferred to the lo...
Page of 4805
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
261 to 280 of 96100 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Wrongful retention of seized Kisan Vikas Patras and Indira Vikas Patras after deposit of the settlement amount justified compensatory interest for loss of opportunity cost, but only from the date the settlement amount was paid until actual release. Because the Settlement Commission's direction to release the instruments after deposit had attained finality, no interest was payable for any earlier period. The amount awarded was treated as restitution for unjustified deprivation, not statutory refund interest, and the Court also allowed further simple interest at 4% per annum on that compensatory amount until payment.
Wrongful retention of seized Kisan Vikas Patras and Indira Vikas Patras after deposit of the settlement amount justified compensatory interest for loss of opportunity cost, but only from the date the settlement amount was paid until actual release. Because the Settlement Commission's direction to release the instruments after deposit had attained finality, no interest was payable for any earlier period. The amount awarded was treated as restitution for unjustified deprivation, not statutory refund interest, and the Court also allowed further simple interest at 4% per annum on that compensatory amount until payment.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.