https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=40342 Money collected as water cess without authority of law was held refundable in writ jurisdiction under Article 226, where the refund claim followed a declaration that the levy itself was unlawful and no special statutory refund mechanism applied. The Court distinguished such claims from independent money claims and accepted the writ remedy on the facts. Refund was also not barred by delay and laches, res judicata, or unjust enrichment, because the claims were made within a reasonable time after the levy was invalidated, the cess had been paid under protest, no prejudice to third parties was shown, and the burden had not been passed on. The refund orders were upheld. en-us Wed, 24 Jan 2001 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 06 Oct 2025 16:28:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=40342 Money collected as water cess without authority of law was held refundable in writ jurisdiction under Article 226, where the refund claim followed a declaration that the levy itself was unlawful and no special statutory refund mechanism applied. The Court distinguished such claims from independent money claims and accepted the writ remedy on the facts. Refund was also not barred by delay and laches, res judicata, or unjust enrichment, because the claims were made within a reasonable time after the levy was invalidated, the cess had been paid under protest, no prejudice to third parties was shown, and the burden had not been passed on. The refund orders were upheld. Case-Laws VAT / Sales Tax Wed, 24 Jan 2001 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=40342