<?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>2022 (4) TMI 980 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=421314</link>
    <description>The SC reversed the HC&#039;s award of 9% interest on delayed refund of unutilized input tax credit for export goods, reducing it to 6% per annum. The court held that under Section 56 of the CGST Act, the principal provision prescribes 6% interest for delayed refunds, while the 9% rate in the proviso applies only to refunds arising from orders of adjudicating/appellate authorities or courts. Since these cases involved direct refund applications under Section 54 and not consequent to any adjudicatory order, the 6% rate was applicable. The court emphasized that statutory interest rates must be followed as prescribed, citing precedents that where statutes specify interest rates, courts cannot award higher rates absent exceptional circumstances.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 19 Apr 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 02 Apr 2025 14:20:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=676697" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2022 (4) TMI 980 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=421314</link>
      <description>The SC reversed the HC&#039;s award of 9% interest on delayed refund of unutilized input tax credit for export goods, reducing it to 6% per annum. The court held that under Section 56 of the CGST Act, the principal provision prescribes 6% interest for delayed refunds, while the 9% rate in the proviso applies only to refunds arising from orders of adjudicating/appellate authorities or courts. Since these cases involved direct refund applications under Section 54 and not consequent to any adjudicatory order, the 6% rate was applicable. The court emphasized that statutory interest rates must be followed as prescribed, citing precedents that where statutes specify interest rates, courts cannot award higher rates absent exceptional circumstances.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>GST</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 19 Apr 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=421314</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>