https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=127920 A retrospective validating amendment to sales tax law did not, by itself, authorise recovery of a refund that had been lawfully granted and received under a binding appellate order. The amendment in section 17 of Madras Act XV of 1956 validated tax already levied or collected under the amended charging provision, but it did not convert a completed, lawful refund into an unlawful payment made under mistake of law. In the absence of clear statutory authority to reopen and recover that completed refund, the demand notices were unsustainable and had to be quashed. en-us Fri, 20 Nov 1959 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 23 Mar 2013 12:08:15 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=127920 A retrospective validating amendment to sales tax law did not, by itself, authorise recovery of a refund that had been lawfully granted and received under a binding appellate order. The amendment in section 17 of Madras Act XV of 1956 validated tax already levied or collected under the amended charging provision, but it did not convert a completed, lawful refund into an unlawful payment made under mistake of law. In the absence of clear statutory authority to reopen and recover that completed refund, the demand notices were unsustainable and had to be quashed. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Fri, 20 Nov 1959 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=127920