https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=112421 Money paid as share application money for allotment of shares was treated as money received for the payer's use and, on the facts, was not shown to have been refunded. The company's compromise relating to a different share claim did not establish repayment. However, the refund claim was governed by Article 24 of the Limitation Act, 1963, not Article 70, because the money was neither a deposit nor pawned movable property. Limitation therefore ran from receipt of the money, and the claim filed years later was time-barred. The appeal consequently failed. en-us Tue, 16 Aug 2005 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 28 Apr 2012 13:20:06 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=112421 Money paid as share application money for allotment of shares was treated as money received for the payer's use and, on the facts, was not shown to have been refunded. The company's compromise relating to a different share claim did not establish repayment. However, the refund claim was governed by Article 24 of the Limitation Act, 1963, not Article 70, because the money was neither a deposit nor pawned movable property. Limitation therefore ran from receipt of the money, and the claim filed years later was time-barred. The appeal consequently failed. Case-Laws Companies Law Tue, 16 Aug 2005 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=112421