https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=74793 Where the petitioners stood on the same factual footing as the matters already decided by the Supreme Court, the High Court held that relief could not be denied merely because the Supreme Court had said its order was not to be treated as a precedent. The common confiscation order and redemption fine having already been set aside in the connected matters, the petitioners were entitled to refund of the redemption fine paid under the impugned order, with interest at 12% per annum if the amount was not refunded within one month. en-us Tue, 25 Apr 1989 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 18 Aug 2011 16:31:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=74793 Where the petitioners stood on the same factual footing as the matters already decided by the Supreme Court, the High Court held that relief could not be denied merely because the Supreme Court had said its order was not to be treated as a precedent. The common confiscation order and redemption fine having already been set aside in the connected matters, the petitioners were entitled to refund of the redemption fine paid under the impugned order, with interest at 12% per annum if the amount was not refunded within one month. Case-Laws Customs Tue, 25 Apr 1989 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=74793