TMI Blog1994 (11) TMI 145X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d under the statute and the general law of limitation invoked by various High Courts under their extra-ordinary jurisdiction is inapplicable to the cases where the refund obligations has been moved before the Revenue authorities. Since the appellant had filed an application under Rule 11 read with Rule 173J and sought its remedy under the Statute it was bound by the limitation provided under th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... at this decision has been upheld by this Court. The appellant, therefore, on 12th and 16th June, 1978 filed two applications for refund of duty paid by it before the Assistant Collector for the period 1-4-1977 to 31-3-1978 and 18-6-1975 to 31-3-1977 respectively. It was claimed that in view of the decision in English Electric Co. (supra), the insulators manufactured by the appellant could not have ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... not go against it. 3. In challenging the order of Tribunal the learned Counsel for the appellant urged that the duty having been paid under mistake of law, the period of limitation applicable was three years. Reliance is placed on Commissioner of Sales Tax, U.P. v. Auriaya Chamber of Commerce, Allahabad, 1986 (25) E.L.T. 867, D. Cawasji Co. Ors. v. State of Mysore Anr., 1978 (2) E.L.T. (J ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... xcise Act and the Rules framed thereunder must be adhered to. The Authorities functioning under the Act are bound by the provisions of the Act." 5. Since the appellant had filed an application under Rule 11 read with Rule 173J and sought its remedy under the Statute it was bound by the limitation provided under the Act and the Rules. It was not open to the appellant to claim that even though the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
