https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=90653 The CESTAT held that Section 11B of the CEA, which prescribes the time limit for refund claims, applies solely to excise duty and does not extend to amounts paid without any legal liability. The appellant's payment was made under a mistaken belief of liability, which the Department and Adjudicating Authority conceded was incorrect. The Tribunal reaffirmed that the Department cannot retain funds paid erroneously and that such refund claims are not barred by Section 11B. The impugned order by the Commissioner (Appeals), which denied the refund, was found to contravene binding precedents set by the Supreme Court and various High Courts and CESTAT benches. Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the impugned order and allowed the appeal, directing the refund of the erroneously paid amount to the appellant. en-us Sat, 19 Jul 2025 13:40:07 +0530 Sat, 19 Jul 2025 13:40:07 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=90653 The CESTAT held that Section 11B of the CEA, which prescribes the time limit for refund claims, applies solely to excise duty and does not extend to amounts paid without any legal liability. The appellant's payment was made under a mistaken belief of liability, which the Department and Adjudicating Authority conceded was incorrect. The Tribunal reaffirmed that the Department cannot retain funds paid erroneously and that such refund claims are not barred by Section 11B. The impugned order by the Commissioner (Appeals), which denied the refund, was found to contravene binding precedents set by the Supreme Court and various High Courts and CESTAT benches. Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the impugned order and allowed the appeal, directing the refund of the erroneously paid amount to the appellant. Highlights Service Tax Sat, 19 Jul 2025 13:40:07 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=90653