Industrial policy benefit enforcement after GST regime shift upheld where appellate direction had already been complied with.

Enforcement of an appellate direction and extension of industrial policy benefits were sought after the GST regime changed the policy framework. The High Court noted that the respondent had already accepted the petitioner's investment in construction in compliance with the appellate authority's order, but withheld the consequential benefit by relying on the post-GST position and the inapplicability of the earlier policy benefit. It further recorded that a later circular had modified the policy framework and that the respondent's own subsequent order showed compliance with the appellate direction. The petitioner was held entitled to the benefit flowing from the respondent's order dated 05/01/2022, and the benefit was directed to be extended within three months.

---

---

Issues: Whether the petitioner was entitled to enforcement of the appellate order and extension of the benefit under the modified industrial policy/circular.

Analysis: The respondents had already accepted the petitioner's investment in construction pursuant to the appellate authority's order, but the corresponding benefit under the policy was not extended on the ground that the petitioner could not claim the earlier policy benefit after the GST regime. The Court noted that a fresh circular issued after the GST regime had modified the policy framework and that the respondent's own subsequent order reflected compliance with the appellate direction, yet the consequential benefit was withheld.

Conclusion: The petitioner was held entitled to the benefit flowing from the respondent's order dated 05/01/2022, and the respondents were directed to extend that benefit within three months.

---