https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=40945 Limitation under refund rules did not bar writ relief where duty was allegedly collected without authority of law, and recovery of money paid under mistake remained available within the legally recognised period from discovery. Properzi rods were held not to fall within Item 27 as it then stood before insertion of sub-item (aa), but the intermediate molten aluminium in crude form was treated as dutiable under Item 27(a) during the continuous manufacturing process. Even so, refund was denied because the duty burden had been passed on to consumers; granting refund to the claimants would amount to unjust enrichment and was not warranted in writ jurisdiction. en-us Tue, 27 Nov 1979 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 18 May 2010 12:22:12 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=40945 Limitation under refund rules did not bar writ relief where duty was allegedly collected without authority of law, and recovery of money paid under mistake remained available within the legally recognised period from discovery. Properzi rods were held not to fall within Item 27 as it then stood before insertion of sub-item (aa), but the intermediate molten aluminium in crude form was treated as dutiable under Item 27(a) during the continuous manufacturing process. Even so, refund was denied because the duty burden had been passed on to consumers; granting refund to the claimants would amount to unjust enrichment and was not warranted in writ jurisdiction. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 27 Nov 1979 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=40945