https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=289247 Section 40 of the Central Excises and Salt Act did not bar a civil suit for refund where excise duty was alleged to have been illegally or ultra vires levied and collected; the provision was treated as not excluding civil jurisdiction for recovery of money paid without lawful authority. Rule 223-A was construed as allowing only a reasonable allowance for waste by evaporation or other natural causes, so duty could not be charged on actual weight loss attributable to dryage and evaporation. The excess levy on the disallowed portion of weight was therefore unauthorized and refundable. en-us Fri, 24 Jun 1960 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 22 Jul 2020 11:44:38 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=289247 Section 40 of the Central Excises and Salt Act did not bar a civil suit for refund where excise duty was alleged to have been illegally or ultra vires levied and collected; the provision was treated as not excluding civil jurisdiction for recovery of money paid without lawful authority. Rule 223-A was construed as allowing only a reasonable allowance for waste by evaporation or other natural causes, so duty could not be charged on actual weight loss attributable to dryage and evaporation. The excess levy on the disallowed portion of weight was therefore unauthorized and refundable. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 24 Jun 1960 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=289247