Ask Jurishour AI

Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
tdb_templates
saswp_reviews
saswp-collections
saswp_rvs_location
tdc-review-email
web-story-font
web-story
googlesitekit_email
tds_locker
tds_email
saswp
mailpoet_page
mailpoet_email
tdcpt_tunes
tdc-review
pronamic_payment
pronamic_gateway
pronamic_pay_subscr
wpcode
HomeIndirect TaxesAmounts Appropriated During Pendency Of Appeal—Despite Existence Of Stay Order—Must Be Treated...

Amounts Appropriated During Pendency Of Appeal—Despite Existence Of Stay Order—Must Be Treated As Payments Made ‘Under Protest’, Refund Not Subjected To Limitation: Madras HC

Indirect Taxes

Published on

By Mariya Paliwala
Madras HC

🚀 Stay Connected With JurisHour

WhatsApp X Telegram

The Madras High Court has held that amounts appropriated by the department during the pendency of an appeal—despite the existence of a stay order—must be treated as payments made “under protest,” and therefore, refund claims in such cases are not subject to the limitation period under Section 11B of the Central Excise Act. The bench…

Membership Required

You must be a member to access this content.

View Membership Levels

Already a member? Log in here
Mariya Paliwala
Mariya Paliwalahttps://www.jurishour.in/
Mariya is the Senior Editor at Juris Hour. She has 7+ years of experience on covering tax litigation stories from the Supreme Court, High Courts and various tribunals including CESTAT, ITAT, NCLAT, NCLT, etc. Mariya graduated from MLSU Law College, Udaipur (Raj.) with B.A.LL.B. and also holds an LL.M. She started her career as a freelance tax reporter in the leading online legal news companies.

Latest articles

Case Compilation

JURISHOUR | TAX LAW DAILY BULLETIN : 22 SEPTEMBER, 2026

Here’s the Tax Law Daily Bulletin for September 22, 2026.GSTGSTN INTRODUCES EMSIGNER VERSION 3.3...
Supreme Court

Bribe Demand and Acceptance Must Be Proved; Money Recovery Alone Can’t Sustain Conviction: Supreme Court

The Supreme Court has set aside the conviction of a Patwari under Sections 7...
GST

Statutory SCN Mandatory For GST Demand: GSTAT

The Goods and Services Tax Appellate Tribunal (GSTAT), Kolkata Bench, has set aside a...
GST

GST | S. 74 Can’t Be Invoked Without Wilful Suppression or Intent to Evade Tax: Gauhati High Court

The Gauhati High Court has set aside a Goods and Services Tax (GST) show...

More like this

Case Compilation

JURISHOUR | TAX LAW DAILY BULLETIN : 22 SEPTEMBER, 2026

Here’s the Tax Law Daily Bulletin for September 22, 2026.GSTGSTN INTRODUCES EMSIGNER VERSION 3.3...
Supreme Court

Bribe Demand and Acceptance Must Be Proved; Money Recovery Alone Can’t Sustain Conviction: Supreme Court

The Supreme Court has set aside the conviction of a Patwari under Sections 7...
GST

Statutory SCN Mandatory For GST Demand: GSTAT

The Goods and Services Tax Appellate Tribunal (GSTAT), Kolkata Bench, has set aside a...