Just a moment...

Top
FeedbackReport
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Feedback/Report an Error
Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Make Most of Text Search
  1. Checkout this video tutorial: How to search effectively on TaxTMI.
  2. Put words in double quotes for exact word search, eg: "income tax"
  3. Avoid noise words such as : 'and, of, the, a'
  4. Sort by Relevance to get the most relevant document.
  5. Press Enter to add multiple terms/multiple phrases, and then click on Search to Search.
  6. Text Search
  7. The system will try to fetch results that contains ALL your words.
  8. Once you add keywords, you'll see a new 'Search In' filter that makes your results even more precise.
  9. Text Search
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
❮❮ Hide
Default View
Expand ❯❯
Close ✕
🔎 Case Laws - Adv. Search
TEXT SEARCH:

Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search

Search In:
Main Text + AI Text
  • Main Text
  • Main Text + AI Text
  • AI Text
  • Title Only
  • Head Notes
  • Citation
Party Name: ?
Party name / Appeal No.
Law:
---- All Laws----
  • ---- All Laws----
  • GST
  • Income Tax
  • Benami Property
  • Customs
  • Corporate Laws
  • Securities / SEBI
  • Insolvency & Bankruptcy
  • FEMA
  • Law of Competition
  • PMLA
  • Service Tax
  • Central Excise
  • CST, VAT & Sales Tax
  • Wealth tax
  • Indian Laws
Courts: ?
Select Court or Tribunal
---- All Courts ----
  • ---- All Courts ----
  • Supreme Court - All
  • Supreme Court
  • SC Orders / Highlights
  • High Court
  • Appellate Tribunal
  • Tribunal
  • Appellate authority for Advance Ruling
  • Advance Ruling Authority
  • National Financial Reporting Authority
  • Competition Commission of India
  • ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY
  • Commission
  • Central Government
  • Board
  • DISTRICT/ SESSIONS Court
  • Commissioner / Appellate Authority
  • Other
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court
Landmark: ?
Where case is referred in other cases
---- All Cases ----
  • ---- All Cases ----
  • Referred in >= 3 Cases
  • Referred in >= 4 Cases
  • Referred in >= 5 Cases
  • Referred in >= 10 Cases
  • Referred in >= 15 Cases
  • Referred in >= 25 Cases
  • Referred in >= 50 Cases
  • Referred in >= 100 Cases
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:
TMI Citation:
Year
  • Year
  • 2025
  • 2024
  • 2023
  • 2022
  • 2021
  • 2020
  • 2019
  • 2018
  • 2017
  • 2016
  • 2015
  • 2014
  • 2013
  • 2012
  • 2011
  • 2010
  • 2009
  • 2008
  • 2007
  • 2006
  • 2005
  • 2004
  • 2003
  • 2002
  • 2001
  • 2000
  • 1999
  • 1998
  • 1997
  • 1996
  • 1995
  • 1994
  • 1993
  • 1992
  • 1991
  • 1990
  • 1989
  • 1988
  • 1987
  • 1986
  • 1985
  • 1984
  • 1983
  • 1982
  • 1981
  • 1980
  • 1979
  • 1978
  • 1977
  • 1976
  • 1975
  • 1974
  • 1973
  • 1972
  • 1971
  • 1970
  • 1969
  • 1968
  • 1967
  • 1966
  • 1965
  • 1964
  • 1963
  • 1962
  • 1961
  • 1960
  • 1959
  • 1958
  • 1957
  • 1956
  • 1955
  • 1954
  • 1953
  • 1952
  • 1951
  • 1950
  • 1949
  • 1948
  • 1947
  • 1946
  • 1945
  • 1944
  • 1943
  • 1942
  • 1941
  • 1940
  • 1939
  • 1938
  • 1937
  • 1936
  • 1935
  • 1934
  • 1933
  • 1932
  • 1931
  • 1930
Volume
  • Volume
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
TMI
Example : 2024 (6) TMI 204
By Case ID:

When case Id is present, search is done only for this

Sort By: ?
Even if Sort by Date is selected, exact match will be shown on the top.
RelevanceDate
    No Records Found
    ❯❯
    MaximizeMaximizeMaximize
    0 / 200
    Expand Note
    Add to Folder

    No Folders have been created

      +

      Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?

      NOTE:

      Case Laws
      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Results Found:
      AI TextQuick Glance by AIHeadnote
      No Records Found

      Case Laws

      Back

      All Case Laws

      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Showing
      Records
      ExpandCollapse
        No Records Found

        Case Laws

        Back

        All Case Laws

        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :

        📋
        Contents
        Note

        Note

        Note

        Bookmark

        print

        Print

        Login to TaxTMI
        Verification Pending

        The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on

        Didn't receive the mail? Resend Mail

        Don't have an account? Register Here

        <h1>Court upholds excise duty changes, rejects challenges. Government's authority affirmed, public interest cited. Limited judicial review emphasized.</h1> <h3>VVF LTD. Versus UNION OF INDIA</h3> VVF LTD. Versus UNION OF INDIA - tmi Issues Involved:1. Challenge to Notifications No. 16/2008-C.E dated 27.3.2008 and No. 33/2008-C.E dated 10.6.2008.2. Alleged violation of Promissory Estoppel.3. Alleged discrimination and violation of Article 14 of the Constitution.4. Scope of Judicial Review in fiscal policy and statutory notifications.Issue-Wise Analysis:1. Challenge to Notifications No. 16/2008-C.E dated 27.3.2008 and No. 33/2008-C.E dated 10.6.2008:The petitioners, comprising industrial units in the Kutch district, challenged these notifications on the grounds that they altered the basis of excise duty exemption initially provided under Notification No. 39/2001-C.E dated 31.7.2001. The original notification offered a five-year exemption from excise duty to newly set up industrial units as an incentive to rehabilitate the region post the 2001 earthquake. The impugned notifications shifted the exemption basis from total duty paid to value addition in manufacturing, which petitioners claimed drastically reduced their benefits.2. Alleged Violation of Promissory Estoppel:The petitioners argued that the change in the exemption scheme breached the principle of promissory estoppel. They contended that they had made significant investments based on the promise of a five-year exemption from excise duty. The court, however, held that the doctrine of promissory estoppel cannot be invoked to prevent the government from making changes in public interest. The court cited various precedents, including the case of Motilal Padampat Sugar Mills, which established that promissory estoppel does not apply against legislative functions or statutory duties.3. Alleged Discrimination and Violation of Article 14 of the Constitution:The petitioners claimed that the impugned notifications were discriminatory as they treated newly established units differently from those set up earlier, which had enjoyed the full five-year exemption. The court found that the changes were justified to curb misuse and evasion of excise duty, which was not serving the intended purpose of generating employment and aiding regional rehabilitation. The court emphasized that the amendments applied uniformly to all regions with similar exemption schemes, thus not violating Article 14.4. Scope of Judicial Review in Fiscal Policy and Statutory Notifications:The court reiterated that judicial review of fiscal policy is limited. It cannot substitute its reasoning for that of the government regarding the necessity and adequacy of amendments in fiscal schemes. The court upheld the government's authority under Section 5A of the Central Excise Act to issue and amend exemption notifications in public interest. The court also noted that the notifications were prospective and did not affect benefits already accrued.Conclusion:The court dismissed the petitions, holding that the impugned notifications were within the government's power and justified by public interest. The plea of promissory estoppel was not applicable as the changes were necessary to prevent misuse and ensure the scheme's objectives were met. The court found no violation of Article 14, as the amendments were uniformly applied and aimed at addressing genuine issues in the implementation of the exemption scheme. The court also highlighted that the petitioners could approach the government for any specific anomalies or hardships arising from the new notifications.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found