https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=793679 Refund of service tax allegedly paid twice on railway freight was said to depend on verification of whether both the service provider and the claimant discharged tax on the same service; where double payment was established, the claimant's payment could not be retained and the matter required fresh adjudication on facts. The note also states that a refund of tax paid under mistake of law was not barred by the one-year limitation under Section 11B of the Central Excise Act, 1944, so the limitation objection failed. The refund claim was therefore treated as not time-barred, while entitlement on merits was remanded for factual verification. en-us Tue, 16 Jun 2026 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 22 Jun 2026 08:39:13 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=793679 Refund of service tax allegedly paid twice on railway freight was said to depend on verification of whether both the service provider and the claimant discharged tax on the same service; where double payment was established, the claimant's payment could not be retained and the matter required fresh adjudication on facts. The note also states that a refund of tax paid under mistake of law was not barred by the one-year limitation under Section 11B of the Central Excise Act, 1944, so the limitation objection failed. The refund claim was therefore treated as not time-barred, while entitlement on merits was remanded for factual verification. Case-Laws Service Tax Tue, 16 Jun 2026 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=793679