Just a moment...
Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether excise duty recovered without authority of law could be ordered to be refunded for the full period claimed, notwithstanding the lapse of more than three years from the date of knowledge of the mistake.
Analysis: The duty had been collected by including post-manufacture expenses and charges in the assessable value of extruded aluminium tubes. The levy was held to be unauthorised in earlier decisions of the same Court, and the Court treated the collection as illegal and without jurisdiction. Referring to the governing principle under Article 265 of the Constitution of India and the Supreme Court's exposition on refunds arising from mistake of law, the Court held that once the recovery itself was without authority of law, the refund could not be confined by a three-year limitation merely because the assessee learnt of the mistake later. The Court also rejected the contention that completed assessments barred relief, since an illegal collection cannot be retained on that basis.
Conclusion: The refund claim for the entire period was maintainable and was allowed in full in favour of the assessee.
Ratio Decidendi: Money recovered as tax or duty without authority of law is refundable in writ jurisdiction, and such restitution is not defeated merely because the claim is made beyond three years from payment or from discovery of the mistake.