https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=94556 The HC declined to entertain the writ petition seeking refund of taxes allegedly paid under mistake of law, holding that a mandamus for refund is not ordinarily maintainable absent a prior demand for justice and its refusal. Relying on binding precedent, the HC reiterated that monetary refund claims, involving issues such as limitation, delay, laches and unjust enrichment, should ordinarily be pursued through appropriate statutory or civil remedies, not by a bare writ for mandamus. The petition was disposed of without examining the merits of the refund claim. The HC clarified that the petitioner remains at liberty to apply for refund or raise a demand for justice in accordance with law, which the competent authority must decide within a reasonable time, without reviving any time-barred claims. en-us Thu, 27 Nov 2025 08:36:27 +0530 Thu, 27 Nov 2025 08:36:29 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=94556 The HC declined to entertain the writ petition seeking refund of taxes allegedly paid under mistake of law, holding that a mandamus for refund is not ordinarily maintainable absent a prior demand for justice and its refusal. Relying on binding precedent, the HC reiterated that monetary refund claims, involving issues such as limitation, delay, laches and unjust enrichment, should ordinarily be pursued through appropriate statutory or civil remedies, not by a bare writ for mandamus. The petition was disposed of without examining the merits of the refund claim. The HC clarified that the petitioner remains at liberty to apply for refund or raise a demand for justice in accordance with law, which the competent authority must decide within a reasonable time, without reviving any time-barred claims. Highlights Customs Thu, 27 Nov 2025 08:36:27 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=94556