Breaking Supreme Court Legal Update
New Delhi · Saturday, 01 August 2026 9888666310 | [email protected]
Free Law — free judgments and free headnotes Free Lawby De Jure
Supreme Court of India 2023-03-24 allowed

MUMBAI – 1 vs M/S. MORARJEE GOKULDAS

Bench: 2 — M. R. Shah, Krishna Murari

In Brief

This case concerns the recovery of an erroneous refund of excise duty granted to a textile manufacturer. The central issue was whether the Revenue must issue a separate notice under Section 11A of the Central Excise Act to recover duty when an order granting refund is reviewed and set aside under Section 35E. The Supreme Court held that once a refund order is set aside under Section 35E within the prescribed time limit, no separate Section 11A notice is required. Sections 35E and 11A operate in different fields with different time limits; reading them otherwise would render Section 35E ineffective. The Court overruled the High Court and Tribunal, restoring the Commissioner's order denying the refund.

The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.

Central Excise Law Refunds and Recovery Administrative Law Appellate Procedure Time Limitation

Read the full judgment & headnote. It's free.

Register to read the complete Supreme Court judgment text and the headnote, and to search 1 lakh+ Supreme Court judgments by meaning. It is a free service.

Register Free Login