<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2015 (8) TMI 442 - SC Order</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=262525</link>
    <description>Interest on refund was confined to the duty component where duty, fine and penalty had been deposited under protest and the refund later became due in the depositor&#039;s favour. The Court held that the interest entitlement did not extend to amounts paid as fine or penalty, because the refund liability arose only in relation to the duty amount. Accordingly, interest at 12% was payable only on the duty amount and not on the fine and penalty.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 01 May 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 30 Aug 2017 11:25:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=393072" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2015 (8) TMI 442 - SC Order</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=262525</link>
      <description>Interest on refund was confined to the duty component where duty, fine and penalty had been deposited under protest and the refund later became due in the depositor&#039;s favour. The Court held that the interest entitlement did not extend to amounts paid as fine or penalty, because the refund liability arose only in relation to the duty amount. Accordingly, interest at 12% was payable only on the duty amount and not on the fine and penalty.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 01 May 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=262525</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>