https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=78886 Promissory estoppel and legitimate expectation cannot be used to compel payment where the claim is linked to a prior fraudulent encashment and would prejudice public interest. The Court treated the earlier representation as non-enforceable against the Government, holding that equity will not protect a party that has already obtained pecuniary advantage at the public exchequer's cost. It also accepted that prior binding directions between the parties and the claimant's earlier wrongful gain justified an equitable adjustment, making later release conditional on repayment of the earlier amount. The repayment-and-release mechanism was therefore upheld, and immediate payment was denied. en-us Thu, 18 Mar 2010 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 23 Dec 2010 19:37:21 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=78886 Promissory estoppel and legitimate expectation cannot be used to compel payment where the claim is linked to a prior fraudulent encashment and would prejudice public interest. The Court treated the earlier representation as non-enforceable against the Government, holding that equity will not protect a party that has already obtained pecuniary advantage at the public exchequer's cost. It also accepted that prior binding directions between the parties and the claimant's earlier wrongful gain justified an equitable adjustment, making later release conditional on repayment of the earlier amount. The repayment-and-release mechanism was therefore upheld, and immediate payment was denied. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 18 Mar 2010 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=78886