https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=47149 Refund of excise duty was unavailable where the amended refund scheme required proof that the duty incidence had not been passed on, and the statutory presumption under the excise law was not rebutted by any pleading or evidence. Writ jurisdiction could not be used to grant refund without establishing actual entitlement, so the challenge failed. Amounts obtained only under interim mandatory orders were subject to restitution once the petitions failed; the recipients had to restore the sums with interest to place the parties in the position they would have occupied absent interim relief, and the undertakings furnished supported that obligation. en-us Fri, 17 Feb 1995 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 27 Jul 2010 12:14:25 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=47149 Refund of excise duty was unavailable where the amended refund scheme required proof that the duty incidence had not been passed on, and the statutory presumption under the excise law was not rebutted by any pleading or evidence. Writ jurisdiction could not be used to grant refund without establishing actual entitlement, so the challenge failed. Amounts obtained only under interim mandatory orders were subject to restitution once the petitions failed; the recipients had to restore the sums with interest to place the parties in the position they would have occupied absent interim relief, and the undertakings furnished supported that obligation. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 17 Feb 1995 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=47149