Prospective rescission of tax notifications and industrial classification determined eligibility; governmental estoppel under Nestle India was found inapplicable.

Section 17(2) of the Madhya Pradesh Commercial Tax Act, 1994 allows rescission of a notification with prospective effect only, and the later notification here did not rescind the original one but merely classified industries by production status and steps for establishment. On the facts, the petitioner was not registered as an industrial unit on or before the cut-off date and therefore did not fall within the protected class entitled to the benefit. The principle of governmental estoppel discussed in Nestle India was inapplicable because the Government was not acting contrary to the original notification. No reference to a larger Bench was warranted, and the petition failed.

---

---

Issues: Whether the challenge to the amended notification required reconsideration by a larger Bench in view of section 17(2) of the Madhya Pradesh Commercial Tax Act, 1994 and the decision in Nestle India, and whether the petition had become infructuous.

Analysis: Section 17(2) permits rescission of a notification issued under section 17 and provides that such rescission operates prospectively. The original notification was not rescinded; instead, the later notification classified industries into those already in production and those taking effective steps for establishment. On the facts, the petitioner was not registered as an industrial unit on or before the specified cut-off date and therefore did not fall within the class entitled to the benefit. The reasoning in Nestle India, dealing with governmental estoppel, did not apply because the Government was not acting contrary to the original notification.

Conclusion: The matter did not warrant reference to a larger Bench and the petition failed.

---