https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=151754 Where an earlier tribunal order had decided only the date from which refund interest was payable and had left the rate open, a subsequent miscellaneous application could not be used to seek quantification at 12% per annum. The Assistant Commissioner, while implementing that direction, passed a separate appealable order and quantified delayed refund interest at 6% per annum under Notification No. 75/2003-N.T. dated 12-9-03. As the rate of interest was not covered by the tribunal's earlier direction, the applications were not maintainable as mere implementation proceedings and were rejected; any challenge to the separate order had to be taken before the appropriate appellate authority. en-us Fri, 07 Aug 2009 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 15 Jun 2013 10:40:06 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=151754 Where an earlier tribunal order had decided only the date from which refund interest was payable and had left the rate open, a subsequent miscellaneous application could not be used to seek quantification at 12% per annum. The Assistant Commissioner, while implementing that direction, passed a separate appealable order and quantified delayed refund interest at 6% per annum under Notification No. 75/2003-N.T. dated 12-9-03. As the rate of interest was not covered by the tribunal's earlier direction, the applications were not maintainable as mere implementation proceedings and were rejected; any challenge to the separate order had to be taken before the appropriate appellate authority. Case-Laws Customs Fri, 07 Aug 2009 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=151754