<?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>2006 (3) TMI 164 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=47733</link>
    <description>The court upheld the demand for interest from 26th August, 1995, as legal under Section 28AA of the Customs Act, 1962. It determined that the liability to pay interest arose from the failure to pay duty within the concessional period, regardless of pending appeals. The court directed the respondent to recalculate the interest amount, excluding the period when Rs. 50,00,000 was deposited, and apply the correct interest rates. The initial interest calculation was set aside, and no costs were awarded.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 08 Mar 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 30 Jul 2010 15:37:37 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=86251" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2006 (3) TMI 164 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=47733</link>
      <description>The court upheld the demand for interest from 26th August, 1995, as legal under Section 28AA of the Customs Act, 1962. It determined that the liability to pay interest arose from the failure to pay duty within the concessional period, regardless of pending appeals. The court directed the respondent to recalculate the interest amount, excluding the period when Rs. 50,00,000 was deposited, and apply the correct interest rates. The initial interest calculation was set aside, and no costs were awarded.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 08 Mar 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=47733</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>