https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=110837 The High Court of Madras held that, in proceedings under Article 226, equitable interest could be awarded on refunded money even without an express provision in the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973, because the State's continued retention became wrongful once the liability was set aside. The court also rejected laches, noting that the petitioner had repeatedly pursued refund and no third-party rights had intervened. Interest was confined to the period from 11-4-1997, when the adverse order was set aside, until 27-4-2002, when the refund was received, and was fixed at 9% per annum. en-us Tue, 23 May 2006 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 17 Jul 2026 14:32:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=110837 The High Court of Madras held that, in proceedings under Article 226, equitable interest could be awarded on refunded money even without an express provision in the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973, because the State's continued retention became wrongful once the liability was set aside. The court also rejected laches, noting that the petitioner had repeatedly pursued refund and no third-party rights had intervened. Interest was confined to the period from 11-4-1997, when the adverse order was set aside, until 27-4-2002, when the refund was received, and was fixed at 9% per annum. Case-Laws Companies Law Tue, 23 May 2006 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=110837