9911796707
TMI Blog1984 (11) TMI 70X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in the present rule. 2. In a short compass the facts are that the petitioner wrote to the Departmental Authorities whether he is liable to pay excise duty if he manufactures the products from steel ingots or out of cut or broken steel ingots which according to him, by Notification No. 206/63, dated 30th November, 1963, amended by notification of 1965, is free from excise duty. 3. In reply to the said letter the petitioner was given to understand that he must pay the excise duty and that the notification does not hold good. It appears, it has been held by the Allahabad High Court in Bansal Steelsons Co. v. Union of India - (1974) Tax LR 2439 = 1979 E.L.T. (J262) that the excise duty is not payable on such matters. Thereafter, the petitio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... was belated. Apart from the fact that such plea should not be taken by the Government vis-a-vis a citizen, the question is, the petitioner for a long time tried to get back his money from the Department and proceeded departmentally to get it. When the Department held that the application for refund is barred by limitation, up to the Union of India the petitioner challenged these orders and also applied for refund of the money. It appears that even in some cases the Department itself has made an order of refund, in respect of an application under rule 11 of the Excise Rules. 6. In the circumstances, therefore, in my opinion, it cannot be said in the facts and circumstances of the case that the application of the petitioner under Article 22 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of payment. Nor is there any provision under which the Court could deny refund of tax even if the person who paid it has collected it from his customers and has no subsisting liability or intention to refund it to them, or, for any reason, it is impracticable to do so. 11. In the U.S.A., it is generally held that in the absence of a statute to the contrary, taxes voluntarily paid under a mistake of law with full knowledge of facts cannot be recovered back while taxes paid under a mistake of fact may ordinarily be recovered back (see Corpus Juris Secundum, Volume 84, page 637). Although Section 72 of the Contract Act has been held to cover cases of payment of money under a mistake of law, as the State stands in a peculiar position in respe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
