https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=195975 Where recovery of royalty was stayed and the challenge later failed, restitution required interest on the withheld amount for the stay period, because a party should not retain the financial benefit of an interim order that ultimately proves ineffective. Rule 64-A of the Minerals Concession Rules, 1960 was treated as prescribing the governing interest rate and not as conferring an unguided discretion to adopt a lower contractual rate. Special circumstances justified 18% per annum up to dismissal of the writ petitions, while the statutory rate of 24% per annum applied thereafter until payment. en-us Mon, 04 Jul 2011 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 01 Aug 2023 09:51:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=195975 Where recovery of royalty was stayed and the challenge later failed, restitution required interest on the withheld amount for the stay period, because a party should not retain the financial benefit of an interim order that ultimately proves ineffective. Rule 64-A of the Minerals Concession Rules, 1960 was treated as prescribing the governing interest rate and not as conferring an unguided discretion to adopt a lower contractual rate. Special circumstances justified 18% per annum up to dismissal of the writ petitions, while the statutory rate of 24% per annum applied thereafter until payment. Case-Laws Indian Laws Mon, 04 Jul 2011 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=195975