https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=189089 The High Court found the Prohibition & Excise Superintendent's refusal to grant a refund of Rs. 2,48,612/= to be illegal. Despite the duty demand being quashed by a higher authority, the Superintendent cited under-valuation of goods for the rejection. The Court held the refusal as against legal principles, emphasizing the finality of decisions. It ordered the refund with 9% interest, criticizing the delay caused by the Superintendent's actions and allowing for an inquiry into potential recovery of damages caused to the Government. The Court dismissed the argument of alternative remedy, asserting its writ jurisdiction to ensure justice for the petitioners. en-us Wed, 13 Feb 2013 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 06 Feb 2017 14:18:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=189089 The High Court found the Prohibition & Excise Superintendent's refusal to grant a refund of Rs. 2,48,612/= to be illegal. Despite the duty demand being quashed by a higher authority, the Superintendent cited under-valuation of goods for the rejection. The Court held the refusal as against legal principles, emphasizing the finality of decisions. It ordered the refund with 9% interest, criticizing the delay caused by the Superintendent's actions and allowing for an inquiry into potential recovery of damages caused to the Government. The Court dismissed the argument of alternative remedy, asserting its writ jurisdiction to ensure justice for the petitioners. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 13 Feb 2013 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=189089