Freight subsidy claims depend on fund availability, and separate loan instalments cannot be adjusted absent contractual set-off rights.

Freight subsidy under the Freight Neutralization Scheme was limited by budgetary allocation and quarterly fund availability, so claims could be entertained only to the extent money was actually provided. As no amount was sanctioned or released for the relevant years, the subsidy claims lapsed and no disbursement could be made. The separate interest-free loan agreement contained its own repayment terms and default consequences, and it did not allow set-off of instalments against any subsidy claim. Promissory estoppel did not apply because the loan was advanced under an earlier policy framework, while the subsidy claim arose later and no promise authorized adjustment of the loan liability.

---

---

Issues: Whether the petitioner was entitled to freight subsidy under the Freight Neutralization Scheme and could seek adjustment of its interest-free loan instalments against the claimed subsidy, with reliance on promissory estoppel.

Analysis: The Scheme made eligibility subject to budgetary allocation and quarterly disbursement, and expressly provided that claims would be entertained only to the extent of funds made available. As no amount was sanctioned or provided by the State during the relevant financial years, no disbursement could be made and the claims lapsed. The agreement governing the interest-free loan was an independent contract containing specific repayment terms and penal consequences on default, and it did not provide for set-off against any subsidy claim. Promissory estoppel was inapplicable because the loan had been advanced years earlier under a different policy framework, while the subsidy claim arose under a later scheme and there was no promise permitting adjustment of the loan liability against that claim.

Conclusion: The petitioner was not entitled to freight subsidy from the Scheme, and the claimed adjustment of interest-free loan instalments against the alleged subsidy was not permissible.

---