1979 (5) TMI 145

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... that the appellants filed refund claims in respect of certain amounts of money paid by them as duty for different periods commencing from 1-1-1974 to 31-3-1976. The mistake of having paid this duty wrongly was discovered by them only after the Supreme Court amplified its decision in Voltas case in a subsequent decision in the Atic Industry s case. Hence, it was only after the Atic Industry s case .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e appellants submitted that these should be read with Section 17 of the Limitation Act. They submitted that provisions of Limitation Act would apply in their case as duty paid by them was under mistake of Law and not paid erroneously due to any other reason. They further submitted that the provisions of Section 4 of the Limitation Act have been accepted and are being applied in case of the limitat .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... the appellants, not gone into the merits of the applicability of the Limitation Act in this case. There can, however, not be any dispute that the Limitation Act would apply to quasi-judicial proceedings also and that if the mistake of Law is established by pronouncement of a judgment by the Supreme Court, this Act shall have to be applied. In this case it appears that the mistake of Law was discov .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X