<?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>Interest at 18% and Penalty up to 100% under GST: Re-Examining Proportionality in Fiscal Jurisprudence By Adv. G. Jayaprakash (Former Central Excise Officer)</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/article/detailed?id=15937</link>
    <description>Statutory interest under GST is framed as compensatory but a fixed high statutory rate may exceed economic benchmarks and assume a deterrent character, raising Article 14 proportionality concerns. The penalty scheme separates lower sanctions for non-fraudulent cases from much higher liability where fraud or wilful suppression is alleged; factual characterisation often determines which regime applies. Asymmetry between interest on delayed payments and delayed refunds further challenges systemic coherence. Calibrating interest to a dynamic benchmark and narrowing penalties in interpretive disputes would better balance revenue protection and fairness.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 27 Feb 2026 09:12:11 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 27 Feb 2026 09:12:11 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=888221" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>Interest at 18% and Penalty up to 100% under GST: Re-Examining Proportionality in Fiscal Jurisprudence By Adv. G. Jayaprakash (Former Central Excise Officer)</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/article/detailed?id=15937</link>
      <description>Statutory interest under GST is framed as compensatory but a fixed high statutory rate may exceed economic benchmarks and assume a deterrent character, raising Article 14 proportionality concerns. The penalty scheme separates lower sanctions for non-fraudulent cases from much higher liability where fraud or wilful suppression is alleged; factual characterisation often determines which regime applies. Asymmetry between interest on delayed payments and delayed refunds further challenges systemic coherence. Calibrating interest to a dynamic benchmark and narrowing penalties in interpretive disputes would better balance revenue protection and fairness.</description>
      <category>Articles</category>
      <law>Goods and Services Tax - GST</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 27 Feb 2026 09:12:11 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/article/detailed?id=15937</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>