<?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>2026 (9) TMI 946 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=798920</link>
    <description>Interest on delayed tax payment under the Maharashtra Value Added Tax framework arises only where tax remains unpaid by the due date prescribed by the statute and rules. Dealers qualifying for six-monthly returns may pay tax by the due dates applicable to those returns; compliance cannot be treated as default because of higher turnover in the relevant year, a timing benefit, perceived legislative intent, alleged unjust enrichment, or an alleged colourable device. Section 85(2)(b-3) excludes an appeal against an interest-demand order, supporting writ jurisdiction where no efficacious appellate remedy exists. Interest imposed contrary to the prescribed payment schedule lacks statutory authority and engages Article 265.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 10 Sep 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 15 Sep 2026 08:31:20 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=923053" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2026 (9) TMI 946 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=798920</link>
      <description>Interest on delayed tax payment under the Maharashtra Value Added Tax framework arises only where tax remains unpaid by the due date prescribed by the statute and rules. Dealers qualifying for six-monthly returns may pay tax by the due dates applicable to those returns; compliance cannot be treated as default because of higher turnover in the relevant year, a timing benefit, perceived legislative intent, alleged unjust enrichment, or an alleged colourable device. Section 85(2)(b-3) excludes an appeal against an interest-demand order, supporting writ jurisdiction where no efficacious appellate remedy exists. Interest imposed contrary to the prescribed payment schedule lacks statutory authority and engages Article 265.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT / Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 10 Sep 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=798920</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>