https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=44880 The dominant issue was whether a writ petition under Article 226 seeking only interest on delayed refund of customs duty, redemption fine, and penalty was maintainable. The SC held that, prior to insertion of Section 27A by Act 22 of 1995, the Customs Act conferred no statutory right to interest on delayed refund; the claim was merely compensatory for alleged wrongful retention and thus not enforcement of a legal right. Applying Suganmal, the SC ruled that such a writ is not maintainable when interest is sought as the sole relief; cases awarding interest as consequential relief upon quashing an illegal levy were distinguished. The appeal was allowed and the HC judgment was set aside. en-us Wed, 04 Mar 1998 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 30 Dec 2025 19:52:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=44880 The dominant issue was whether a writ petition under Article 226 seeking only interest on delayed refund of customs duty, redemption fine, and penalty was maintainable. The SC held that, prior to insertion of Section 27A by Act 22 of 1995, the Customs Act conferred no statutory right to interest on delayed refund; the claim was merely compensatory for alleged wrongful retention and thus not enforcement of a legal right. Applying Suganmal, the SC ruled that such a writ is not maintainable when interest is sought as the sole relief; cases awarding interest as consequential relief upon quashing an illegal levy were distinguished. The appeal was allowed and the HC judgment was set aside. Case-Laws Customs Wed, 04 Mar 1998 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=44880