https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=87747 HC ruled that Section 11B of Central Excise Act, 1944 does not strictly apply to service tax refund claims made under mistaken legal interpretation. The court held that principles of restitution under Section 72 of Contract Act, 1872 are applicable, mandating refund even beyond prescribed limitation periods. Relying on precedential jurisprudence, the court determined that a writ petition under Article 226 is maintainable for wrongly paid service tax. The impugned order was set aside, and the petition was allowed, compelling the respondent to refund the erroneously paid tax. en-us Fri, 25 Apr 2025 08:53:57 +0530 Fri, 25 Apr 2025 08:53:59 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=87747 HC ruled that Section 11B of Central Excise Act, 1944 does not strictly apply to service tax refund claims made under mistaken legal interpretation. The court held that principles of restitution under Section 72 of Contract Act, 1872 are applicable, mandating refund even beyond prescribed limitation periods. Relying on precedential jurisprudence, the court determined that a writ petition under Article 226 is maintainable for wrongly paid service tax. The impugned order was set aside, and the petition was allowed, compelling the respondent to refund the erroneously paid tax. Highlights Service Tax Fri, 25 Apr 2025 08:53:57 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=87747