https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=797728 Excess service tax paid by mistake where no taxable liability existed is characterised as a deposit rather than duty or tax lawfully leviable. Consequently, the one-year limitation in Section 11B of the Central Excise Act does not govern its refund. Article 265 prevents retention of an amount collected without authority of law. Refund remains conditional on disproving unjust enrichment: invoices and a Superintendent's certificate may establish that the amount was not recovered from service recipients. Where the incidence was not passed on, the excess payment is refundable. en-us Thu, 20 Aug 2026 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 27 Aug 2026 08:28:56 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=797728 Excess service tax paid by mistake where no taxable liability existed is characterised as a deposit rather than duty or tax lawfully leviable. Consequently, the one-year limitation in Section 11B of the Central Excise Act does not govern its refund. Article 265 prevents retention of an amount collected without authority of law. Refund remains conditional on disproving unjust enrichment: invoices and a Superintendent's certificate may establish that the amount was not recovered from service recipients. Where the incidence was not passed on, the excess payment is refundable. Case-Laws Service Tax Thu, 20 Aug 2026 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=797728