<?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 (12) TMI 1307 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=783767</link>
    <description>The dominant issue was whether interest was payable on a confirmed duty demand in a revenue-neutral situation. The Tribunal held that where duty paid by the assessee was available as Cenvat credit to downstream units, there was no net loss to the exchequer; interest being compensatory could not be insisted upon absent pecuniary prejudice to revenue, and thus interest was unwarranted. The Tribunal also determined that refund of duty already paid was barred due to the finality of the order-in-original and the statutory scheme under s. 11B. The HC found no jurisdictional error or perversity and held that no substantial question of law arose, disposing of the appeal.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 22 Dec 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 23 Dec 2025 07:59:03 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=873447" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (12) TMI 1307 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=783767</link>
      <description>The dominant issue was whether interest was payable on a confirmed duty demand in a revenue-neutral situation. The Tribunal held that where duty paid by the assessee was available as Cenvat credit to downstream units, there was no net loss to the exchequer; interest being compensatory could not be insisted upon absent pecuniary prejudice to revenue, and thus interest was unwarranted. The Tribunal also determined that refund of duty already paid was barred due to the finality of the order-in-original and the statutory scheme under s. 11B. The HC found no jurisdictional error or perversity and held that no substantial question of law arose, disposing of the appeal.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 22 Dec 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=783767</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>