https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=42268 Refund of excise duty paid under a common mistake of law was held enforceable under the general law of limitation, because a suit for money paid by mistake would lie under Section 72 of the Indian Contract Act and the claim was brought within the three-year period under Article 113 of the Limitation Act. The departmental limitation in Rule 11 of the Central Excises and Salt Rules, 1944 did not defeat restitution to that extent, and writ relief under Articles 226 and 227 was available for money realised without authority of law. The refund was therefore maintainable for the period within time, while the earliest two days remained time-barred. en-us Fri, 07 Feb 1986 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 10 Jun 2010 11:44:32 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=42268 Refund of excise duty paid under a common mistake of law was held enforceable under the general law of limitation, because a suit for money paid by mistake would lie under Section 72 of the Indian Contract Act and the claim was brought within the three-year period under Article 113 of the Limitation Act. The departmental limitation in Rule 11 of the Central Excises and Salt Rules, 1944 did not defeat restitution to that extent, and writ relief under Articles 226 and 227 was available for money realised without authority of law. The refund was therefore maintainable for the period within time, while the earliest two days remained time-barred. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 07 Feb 1986 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=42268