Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether promissory estoppel was available to a party aggrieved by supersession of a notification issued under statutory powers granting exemption from duty for a stated period.
Analysis: The question had already been decided in favour of the appellants in an earlier decision of the same Court. No affidavit had been filed in the present appeal to raise the additional question whether, even if promissory estoppel was otherwise available, it should be denied on grounds of equity. That issue therefore did not arise for consideration in this appeal.
Conclusion: The plea of promissory estoppel was available to the appellants and the appeal was allowed. Customs duty was directed to be levied at the rate prescribed in the notification dated 15 March 1979, and excess duty was ordered to be refunded.