https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=774630 Amounts paid under mistake of law, where no excise duty was legally leviable, were treated as recoveries without authority of law rather than valid duty payments, so the refund claim was held outside the limitation regime in Section 11B of the Central Excise Act. The dispute goods were regarded as outside the Central Excise net under Chapter Note 5 of Chapter 30, and the limitation objection therefore failed. The refund was also found not barred by unjust enrichment because the assessee showed, through ledger entries, invoices and a Chartered Accountant certificate, that the incidence had not been passed on to buyers. The refund claim was accordingly maintainable with interest. en-us Fri, 11 Jul 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 12 Jul 2025 08:40:46 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=774630 Amounts paid under mistake of law, where no excise duty was legally leviable, were treated as recoveries without authority of law rather than valid duty payments, so the refund claim was held outside the limitation regime in Section 11B of the Central Excise Act. The dispute goods were regarded as outside the Central Excise net under Chapter Note 5 of Chapter 30, and the limitation objection therefore failed. The refund was also found not barred by unjust enrichment because the assessee showed, through ledger entries, invoices and a Chartered Accountant certificate, that the incidence had not been passed on to buyers. The refund claim was accordingly maintainable with interest. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 11 Jul 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=774630