https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=427909 Refund of service tax paid on warehousing services covered by the negative list was held not to be barred by section 11B of the Central Excise Act, 1944 because the payment was treated as one made under mistake of law for a levy not exigible under section 66D of the Finance Act, 1994. On that principle, a payment without authority of law does not acquire the character of duty, and the statutory refund limitation could not defeat restitution. A further objection that supporting evidence was insufficient was rejected because it was raised for the first time at the appellate stage and was not part of the show cause notice or original adjudication. The refund was allowed with consequential relief. en-us Fri, 16 Sep 2022 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 19 Sep 2022 15:08:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=427909 Refund of service tax paid on warehousing services covered by the negative list was held not to be barred by section 11B of the Central Excise Act, 1944 because the payment was treated as one made under mistake of law for a levy not exigible under section 66D of the Finance Act, 1994. On that principle, a payment without authority of law does not acquire the character of duty, and the statutory refund limitation could not defeat restitution. A further objection that supporting evidence was insufficient was rejected because it was raised for the first time at the appellate stage and was not part of the show cause notice or original adjudication. The refund was allowed with consequential relief. Case-Laws Service Tax Fri, 16 Sep 2022 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=427909