https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=42302 Refund claims in writ jurisdiction were treated as stale where duty was paid without protest, no earlier challenge was pursued, and the petitions were filed years later; later case law did not create a fresh limitation point because it was not tied to the factual basis of the levy. Refund was also refused on unjust enrichment grounds, as the duty burden appeared to have been passed on and no material showed repayment to customers. The writ court further declined to decide disputed questions about the character and marketability of the goods without factual inquiry, leaving the matter unsuitable for determination in those proceedings. en-us Wed, 16 Mar 1988 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 10 Jun 2010 13:18:22 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=42302 Refund claims in writ jurisdiction were treated as stale where duty was paid without protest, no earlier challenge was pursued, and the petitions were filed years later; later case law did not create a fresh limitation point because it was not tied to the factual basis of the levy. Refund was also refused on unjust enrichment grounds, as the duty burden appeared to have been passed on and no material showed repayment to customers. The writ court further declined to decide disputed questions about the character and marketability of the goods without factual inquiry, leaving the matter unsuitable for determination in those proceedings. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 16 Mar 1988 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=42302