Reclassification, differential duty, confiscation and penalties quashed where department lacked chemical evidence and improperly reopened past clearan...
Anticipatory bail refused where accused allegedly assaulted and threatened a public servant; custodial interrogation deemed necessary for investigatio...
The HC allowed the petition, setting aside the impugned order dated 09.09.2024, and directed respondents to refund the contested amount with statutory interest at 6% per annum from the date the order of the First Authority became operative, on the ground that the refund was not made within 60 days of that order. The court rejected respondents' plea to attract the higher 9% rate, noting petitioners sought only 6% and that the Appellate Authority had quashed the original rejection dated 14.09.2020. The HC held the rejection to be unlawful and confirmed entitlement to the specified interest on the delayed refund.
The HC allowed the petition, setting aside the impugned order dated 09.09.2024, and directed respondents to refund the contested amount with statutory interest at 6% per annum from the date the order of the First Authority became operative, on the ground that the refund was not made within 60 days of that order. The court rejected respondents' plea to attract the higher 9% rate, noting petitioners sought only 6% and that the Appellate Authority had quashed the original rejection dated 14.09.2020. The HC held the rejection to be unlawful and confirmed entitlement to the specified interest on the delayed refund.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
