<?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>2025 (9) TMI 870 - SC Order</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=778381</link>
    <description>The SC dismissed the appeal and upheld the HC&#039;s order directing payment of interest at 15% on the excess security deposited by the dealer for issuance of Form-31, from date of deposit to refund, despite no statutory provision for such interest under the Act. The SC found no grounds to interfere with the HC judgment and affirmed the refund with interest as ordered.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 11 Sep 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 16 Sep 2025 09:02:39 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=850741" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (9) TMI 870 - SC Order</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=778381</link>
      <description>The SC dismissed the appeal and upheld the HC&#039;s order directing payment of interest at 15% on the excess security deposited by the dealer for issuance of Form-31, from date of deposit to refund, despite no statutory provision for such interest under the Act. The SC found no grounds to interfere with the HC judgment and affirmed the refund with interest as ordered.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT / Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 11 Sep 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=778381</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>