https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=34508 Amounts collected by the Department under coercion, before adjudication and later refunded after the demand was set aside, were treated as deposits wrongfully retained rather than duty paid voluntarily. Once the exemption notification was recognised, the sums were found not due in law, and the unlawful retention for a long period justified interest from the respective dates of deposit. The applicable rate was the rate notified for delayed refund claims. The appellant was therefore entitled to interest on the refunded amounts, and the miscellaneous application was allowed to that extent. en-us Tue, 23 Sep 2008 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 07 Sep 2009 00:00:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=34508 Amounts collected by the Department under coercion, before adjudication and later refunded after the demand was set aside, were treated as deposits wrongfully retained rather than duty paid voluntarily. Once the exemption notification was recognised, the sums were found not due in law, and the unlawful retention for a long period justified interest from the respective dates of deposit. The applicable rate was the rate notified for delayed refund claims. The appellant was therefore entitled to interest on the refunded amounts, and the miscellaneous application was allowed to that extent. Case-Laws Customs Tue, 23 Sep 2008 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=34508