https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=127263 A suit to recover sales tax alleged to have been illegally collected was held to fall under Article 62 of the Limitation Act as a claim for money had and received, with limitation running for three years from receipt. Section 18 of the Madras General Sales Tax Act was confined to suits for compensation or damages for acts done under the Act and did not govern a refund claim, while Article 16 was inapplicable because the amount was not an arrear of revenue or a demand recoverable as such. The civil court's jurisdiction was not ousted, and the refund suit was within time, so the limitation defence failed. en-us Tue, 17 Mar 1953 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 06 Mar 2013 12:42:18 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=127263 A suit to recover sales tax alleged to have been illegally collected was held to fall under Article 62 of the Limitation Act as a claim for money had and received, with limitation running for three years from receipt. Section 18 of the Madras General Sales Tax Act was confined to suits for compensation or damages for acts done under the Act and did not govern a refund claim, while Article 16 was inapplicable because the amount was not an arrear of revenue or a demand recoverable as such. The civil court's jurisdiction was not ousted, and the refund suit was within time, so the limitation defence failed. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Tue, 17 Mar 1953 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=127263