https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=387216 The court found the writ petition maintainable as it involved interpreting the Customs Act and had no factual disputes. It determined the amount collected was "duty," not a deposit, entitling the petitioner to interest under Section 27A of the Customs Act. The court directed the respondent to pay interest from three months after the refund application date. The writ petition was allowed, setting aside the rejection of the interest claim, with no costs imposed. en-us Tue, 15 Oct 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 07 Mar 2020 12:54:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=387216 The court found the writ petition maintainable as it involved interpreting the Customs Act and had no factual disputes. It determined the amount collected was "duty," not a deposit, entitling the petitioner to interest under Section 27A of the Customs Act. The court directed the respondent to pay interest from three months after the refund application date. The writ petition was allowed, setting aside the rejection of the interest claim, with no costs imposed. Case-Laws Customs Tue, 15 Oct 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=387216