https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=41275 Excess excise duty collected on an erroneous interpretation of assessable value under Section 4 was treated as money realised without authority of law. The Delhi High Court held that Article 265 required restitution of the amount, and the revenue's limitation defence could not defeat the constitutional right to refund in writ jurisdiction. The petitioners were therefore entitled to refund of the excess duty, subject to verification, and the writ petition was allowed with a mandamus for refund. en-us Mon, 12 Apr 1982 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 01 Jun 2010 16:32:44 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=41275 Excess excise duty collected on an erroneous interpretation of assessable value under Section 4 was treated as money realised without authority of law. The Delhi High Court held that Article 265 required restitution of the amount, and the revenue's limitation defence could not defeat the constitutional right to refund in writ jurisdiction. The petitioners were therefore entitled to refund of the excess duty, subject to verification, and the writ petition was allowed with a mandamus for refund. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 12 Apr 1982 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=41275