Political contribution deductions require recipient party compliance with contribution-reporting conditions; banking-channel donations alone do not qu...
Aggregation under TNMM prevents selective testing of intra-group services without comparable uncontrolled transactions, while appellate additional cla...
Protective assessment cannot duplicate identical receipts under competing characterisations; remote services did not establish a taxable permanent est...
Current account treatment of overseas tournament services removed most FEMA findings, but excess EEFC remittance and delayed repatriation remained bre...
Modification of bail conditions remains available through inherent jurisdiction where onerous deposits undermine justice and cannot recover disputed d...
Merchant banker regulation consolidates registration, governance, capital, reporting, outsourcing and investor-protection requirements under an update...
The appellants challenged the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) denying eligible interest on the refunded amount. The court held that interest accrued on the deposited amount is the property of the owner, and they cannot be deprived of it. Relying on judicial precedents, the court ruled that once confiscation is set aside, the department cannot deny interest merely due to lack of statutory provision. The Bombay High Court held that seized cash must be refunded with interest. The Kerala High Court, relying on the Supreme Court's decision, held that the interest rate for refunds should be 12%. Although Section 11B and 11BB of the Central Excise Act were inapplicable, the court determined that the appellants were entitled to interest on the refunded amount from the date of payment until disbursement. However, considering a recent notification fixing the interest rate at 6%, the court allowed the appeal, entitling the appellants to interest at 6% on the refunded amount from the date of payment till disbursement.
The appellants challenged the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) denying eligible interest on the refunded amount. The court held that interest accrued on the deposited amount is the property of the owner, and they cannot be deprived of it. Relying on judicial precedents, the court ruled that once confiscation is set aside, the department cannot deny interest merely due to lack of statutory provision. The Bombay High Court held that seized cash must be refunded with interest. The Kerala High Court, relying on the Supreme Court's decision, held that the interest rate for refunds should be 12%. Although Section 11B and 11BB of the Central Excise Act were inapplicable, the court determined that the appellants were entitled to interest on the refunded amount from the date of payment until disbursement. However, considering a recent notification fixing the interest rate at 6%, the court allowed the appeal, entitling the appellants to interest at 6% on the refunded amount from the date of payment till disbursement.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4782
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
