https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=45910 Interest collected under a Central Sales Tax demand without authority of law was treated as refundable in writ jurisdiction under Article 226, because money exacted unlawfully by the State cannot be retained and the refund claim arose from the same unauthorized demand. The Court rejected the objection that the claim concerned only interest, holding that the inseparability of the levy did not prevent restitution. It also held that the writ petition was not barred by delay or limitation, since the demand was challenged shortly after it was raised and the relevant legal position was clarified later; the ordinary three-year analogy was not applied as an inflexible bar. en-us Mon, 17 Apr 2000 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 31 Dec 2013 16:43:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=45910 Interest collected under a Central Sales Tax demand without authority of law was treated as refundable in writ jurisdiction under Article 226, because money exacted unlawfully by the State cannot be retained and the refund claim arose from the same unauthorized demand. The Court rejected the objection that the claim concerned only interest, holding that the inseparability of the levy did not prevent restitution. It also held that the writ petition was not barred by delay or limitation, since the demand was challenged shortly after it was raised and the relevant legal position was clarified later; the ordinary three-year analogy was not applied as an inflexible bar. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Mon, 17 Apr 2000 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=45910