S.ACHARYA, S.BARMAN
M. ABDUL HASSAN – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF ORISSA – Respondent
BARMAN, C. J.
( 1 ) THE petitioners in these writ petitions are dealers in excisable commodities inter alia foreign liquor. The point which arises in these writ petitions is whether a writ of mandamus can be issued for refund of countervailing duty illegally -- by mistake -- collected by a notification under Section 27 of the Bihar and Orissa excise Act (Act 2 of 1915 hereinafter referred to as the Act) dated March 31, 1961.
( 2 ) THESE cases arise out of the decision of the Supreme Court in Kalyani Stores v. Stale of Orissa, AIR 1966 SC 1686 decided on September 21, 1965 where their lordships of the Supreme Court, on an interpretation of the relevant provisions of the Bihar and Orissa Excise Act, declared that the said notification enhancing the duty on foreign liquor by Rs. 30-00 per L. P. gallon was unenforceable. These writ petitions were filed in the month of August 1967 for refund of the countervailing duty illegally collected from the petitioners obviously under a mistake.
( 3 ) THE first question is: Is the petitioners' claim for refund barred by limitation? article 96 of the Limitation Act, 1908 corresponding to Section 17 of the present limitation Act prescribes as per
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.