https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=43065 Refund of excise duty collected without authority of law was held not to be defeated by limitation under the Excise Rules when relief was sought in writ jurisdiction. The Court applied the principle that money recovered under a mistaken or unauthorised levy should ordinarily be refunded, and rejected the limitation objection. The plea of unjust enrichment also failed because the revenue did not produce satisfactory proof that the duty burden had been passed on to consumers; vague assertions were insufficient. Refund was therefore allowed, subject to verification of the claim, and the restriction confining refund to six months was set aside. en-us Thu, 01 Aug 1991 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 16 Jun 2010 09:53:25 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=43065 Refund of excise duty collected without authority of law was held not to be defeated by limitation under the Excise Rules when relief was sought in writ jurisdiction. The Court applied the principle that money recovered under a mistaken or unauthorised levy should ordinarily be refunded, and rejected the limitation objection. The plea of unjust enrichment also failed because the revenue did not produce satisfactory proof that the duty burden had been passed on to consumers; vague assertions were insufficient. Refund was therefore allowed, subject to verification of the claim, and the restriction confining refund to six months was set aside. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 01 Aug 1991 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=43065