https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=42624 A departmental circular could not enlarge refund rights beyond the express limitation in Rule 11 of the Central Excise Rules, so it was unenforceable to the extent it conflicted with the rule; refund could not rest on that circular alone. At the same time, a writ court under Article 226 could still order refund of duty collected without authority of law even after expiry of the statutory refund period. Delay and laches did not bar relief where the assessee acted on the departmental circular and the revenue's own conduct materially contributed to the delayed challenge. The refund order was therefore sustained. en-us Tue, 27 Jun 1989 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 12 Jun 2010 12:59:35 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=42624 A departmental circular could not enlarge refund rights beyond the express limitation in Rule 11 of the Central Excise Rules, so it was unenforceable to the extent it conflicted with the rule; refund could not rest on that circular alone. At the same time, a writ court under Article 226 could still order refund of duty collected without authority of law even after expiry of the statutory refund period. Delay and laches did not bar relief where the assessee acted on the departmental circular and the revenue's own conduct materially contributed to the delayed challenge. The refund order was therefore sustained. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 27 Jun 1989 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=42624