https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=42839 Excise duty paid under mistake of law was held refundable because the revenue could not retain an unauthorised levy by relying on limitation in writ proceedings under Article 226. The objection of unjust enrichment also failed, as the department had to plead and prove that the duty burden was passed on to customers, and it did not discharge that burden. The rejection of refund was therefore unsustainable, and the claimants were held entitled to refund of the duty wrongly paid, subject to quantification and payment of the refundable amount. en-us Mon, 10 Sep 1990 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 29 Apr 2016 16:46:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=42839 Excise duty paid under mistake of law was held refundable because the revenue could not retain an unauthorised levy by relying on limitation in writ proceedings under Article 226. The objection of unjust enrichment also failed, as the department had to plead and prove that the duty burden was passed on to customers, and it did not discharge that burden. The rejection of refund was therefore unsustainable, and the claimants were held entitled to refund of the duty wrongly paid, subject to quantification and payment of the refundable amount. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 10 Sep 1990 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=42839