Overlapping GST proceedings require Central and State authorities to designate one competent authority for coordinated adjudication of the same matter...
Composite healthcare supplies retain exemption when patient care is the contract's essential character, despite payment through an implementing agency...
Receipt of immovable property requires actual possession or enjoyment; redevelopment allotments exchanged for tenancy rights fall outside deemed incom...
The High Court held that the respondents are liable to pay interest on the delayed disbursal of refund u/s 27A of the Customs Act, 1962. The Court clarified that the observation of the amount not being duty was misinterpreted and should be understood in the context that the amount mistakenly deposited could never have been retained by the Customs authorities. The restitutory element of interest was acknowledged as a normal relief in restitution, not controlled by the Interest Acts. The respondents are liable to pay interest from the date of the original application on 24 June 2016 until 29 November 2018 when refunds were ultimately effected. The petition was allowed.
The High Court held that the respondents are liable to pay interest on the delayed disbursal of refund u/s 27A of the Customs Act, 1962. The Court clarified that the observation of the amount not being duty was misinterpreted and should be understood in the context that the amount mistakenly deposited could never have been retained by the Customs authorities. The restitutory element of interest was acknowledged as a normal relief in restitution, not controlled by the Interest Acts. The respondents are liable to pay interest from the date of the original application on 24 June 2016 until 29 November 2018 when refunds were ultimately effected. The petition was allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4784
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
