https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=42867 The court interpreted the contract clause to mean the plaintiff was only liable for the actual excise duty paid by the defendant. It held that the plaintiff could recover the excess payment made under Section 72 of the Indian Contract Act. The court rejected the defendant's claim to retain excess excise duty, ruling in favor of the plaintiff. The appeal was allowed, granting the plaintiff a decree for the claimed amount with interest. Each party was ordered to bear their own costs. en-us Tue, 24 Jul 1990 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 14 Jun 2010 17:23:11 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=42867 The court interpreted the contract clause to mean the plaintiff was only liable for the actual excise duty paid by the defendant. It held that the plaintiff could recover the excess payment made under Section 72 of the Indian Contract Act. The court rejected the defendant's claim to retain excess excise duty, ruling in favor of the plaintiff. The appeal was allowed, granting the plaintiff a decree for the claimed amount with interest. Each party was ordered to bear their own costs. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 24 Jul 1990 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=42867