https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=41076 A civil suit for refund of excise duty paid under mistake was held maintainable because section 40 of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 applies only to acts done in pursuance of the Act or rules and does not bar recovery of unlawfully realised duty. The special refund limitation under the Central Excise Rules, 1944 governed refund applications under the statutory machinery, but did not exclude a civil suit when that remedy failed. Limitation under the Limitation Act, 1963 ran from discovery of the mistake under section 17(1)(c), so the suit filed within three years of the relevant judicial pronouncement was within time. en-us Mon, 17 Mar 1980 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 20 May 2010 17:53:03 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=41076 A civil suit for refund of excise duty paid under mistake was held maintainable because section 40 of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 applies only to acts done in pursuance of the Act or rules and does not bar recovery of unlawfully realised duty. The special refund limitation under the Central Excise Rules, 1944 governed refund applications under the statutory machinery, but did not exclude a civil suit when that remedy failed. Limitation under the Limitation Act, 1963 ran from discovery of the mistake under section 17(1)(c), so the suit filed within three years of the relevant judicial pronouncement was within time. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 17 Mar 1980 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=41076