https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=99354 Retrospective insertion of section 14A barred a dealer from claiming refund of sales tax collected from purchasers and paid under mistake of law, because refund was confined to the person who actually bore the burden and the limitation in section 14 applied. The provision was treated as an ancillary incident of the State's taxing power, covering collection and refund machinery, so it fell within legislative competence. It was also regarded as a reasonable public-interest restriction because it prevented the dealer from retaining tax that did not beneficially belong to it. The amendment was therefore upheld as constitutionally valid. en-us Fri, 24 Mar 1961 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 02 Dec 2013 14:58:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=99354 Retrospective insertion of section 14A barred a dealer from claiming refund of sales tax collected from purchasers and paid under mistake of law, because refund was confined to the person who actually bore the burden and the limitation in section 14 applied. The provision was treated as an ancillary incident of the State's taxing power, covering collection and refund machinery, so it fell within legislative competence. It was also regarded as a reasonable public-interest restriction because it prevented the dealer from retaining tax that did not beneficially belong to it. The amendment was therefore upheld as constitutionally valid. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Fri, 24 Mar 1961 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=99354