https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=49274 Recovery of tax collected beyond a constitutional ceiling was treated as an act in excess of jurisdiction, so the notice and limitation bar under Section 48 of the Central Provinces and Berar Municipalities Act, 1922, did not apply to the excess amount. The majority also held that the statutory appeal, revision and refund machinery did not provide an effective or exclusive remedy for unconstitutional exaction, so civil court jurisdiction was not excluded by Section 84(3). A civil suit to recover the excess tax was therefore maintainable, because exclusion of civil jurisdiction must be clear and effective. en-us Fri, 26 Mar 1965 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 20 Aug 2014 18:54:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=49274 Recovery of tax collected beyond a constitutional ceiling was treated as an act in excess of jurisdiction, so the notice and limitation bar under Section 48 of the Central Provinces and Berar Municipalities Act, 1922, did not apply to the excess amount. The majority also held that the statutory appeal, revision and refund machinery did not provide an effective or exclusive remedy for unconstitutional exaction, so civil court jurisdiction was not excluded by Section 84(3). A civil suit to recover the excess tax was therefore maintainable, because exclusion of civil jurisdiction must be clear and effective. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 26 Mar 1965 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=49274