<?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>2024 (12) TMI 1464 - SECURITIES APPELLATE TRIBUNAL , MUMBAI - LB</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=763884</link>
    <description>The governing stockbroker regulation treated interest on delayed annual turnover fee as mandatory at 15% per annum, so the securities regulator had no discretion to waive or reduce it merely because the fee liability had been litigated for a long period. The Tribunal also recognised that, where a sum remained in the broker&#039;s credit balance for a limited period without corresponding interest being given, fairness required crediting simple interest at 15% per annum for that interval. The result was that the interest levy on the outstanding fee remained payable, while the computation was modified to allow interest credit on the credited amount for the specified period.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 11 Dec 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 30 Dec 2024 15:04:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=785246" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2024 (12) TMI 1464 - SECURITIES APPELLATE TRIBUNAL , MUMBAI - LB</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=763884</link>
      <description>The governing stockbroker regulation treated interest on delayed annual turnover fee as mandatory at 15% per annum, so the securities regulator had no discretion to waive or reduce it merely because the fee liability had been litigated for a long period. The Tribunal also recognised that, where a sum remained in the broker&#039;s credit balance for a limited period without corresponding interest being given, fairness required crediting simple interest at 15% per annum for that interval. The result was that the interest levy on the outstanding fee remained payable, while the computation was modified to allow interest credit on the credited amount for the specified period.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>SEBI</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 11 Dec 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=763884</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>