<?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>2016 (8) TMI 1612 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=460715</link>
    <description>The Interest on Delayed Payments to Small Scale and Ancillary Industrial Undertakings Act, 1993 was held to apply to supplies made after its commencement even where the supply order or contract was earlier, because liability turns on acceptance, deemed acceptance and the appointed day, and the right to statutory interest arises on delayed post-commencement payment. The earlier contrary line of authority was treated as not governing this point. The connected earlier decision did not operate as res judicata because the precise entitlement issue had not been finally and directly decided. The claim for interest was within limitation, and the challenge to the review order was maintainable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 31 Aug 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 12 Feb 2025 19:00:27 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=797316" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (8) TMI 1612 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=460715</link>
      <description>The Interest on Delayed Payments to Small Scale and Ancillary Industrial Undertakings Act, 1993 was held to apply to supplies made after its commencement even where the supply order or contract was earlier, because liability turns on acceptance, deemed acceptance and the appointed day, and the right to statutory interest arises on delayed post-commencement payment. The earlier contrary line of authority was treated as not governing this point. The connected earlier decision did not operate as res judicata because the precise entitlement issue had not been finally and directly decided. The claim for interest was within limitation, and the challenge to the review order was maintainable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 31 Aug 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=460715</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>