https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=153330 Refund of sales tax was not available where the earlier Supreme Court ruling did not invalidate the charging provision or deprive the State assessments of jurisdiction; at most, the schedule entry was wrongly applied, while the assessments remained final and unchallenged in the prescribed manner. Relief under Article 226 was also declined because the writ petitions were brought after substantial delay without satisfactory explanation, and discretionary relief may be refused for laches. The Court further noted that sales tax is ordinarily an indirect levy passed on to purchasers, so refund would risk unjust enrichment where the tax had likely been recovered from consumers. en-us Fri, 18 Apr 1980 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 22 Jul 2013 15:48:56 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=153330 Refund of sales tax was not available where the earlier Supreme Court ruling did not invalidate the charging provision or deprive the State assessments of jurisdiction; at most, the schedule entry was wrongly applied, while the assessments remained final and unchallenged in the prescribed manner. Relief under Article 226 was also declined because the writ petitions were brought after substantial delay without satisfactory explanation, and discretionary relief may be refused for laches. The Court further noted that sales tax is ordinarily an indirect levy passed on to purchasers, so refund would risk unjust enrichment where the tax had likely been recovered from consumers. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Fri, 18 Apr 1980 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=153330