https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=156371 A later notification under the Haryana General Sales Tax Act could not retrospectively curtail an exemption already granted to tiny industrial units where the beneficiaries had altered their position by setting up units on that assurance. Promissory estoppel applied because the exemption was conferred by executive notification under delegated power, and no overriding legislative change or equitable basis for withdrawal was shown. The notification was therefore unenforceable against that class. By contrast, khadi and village industries were treated as a different category of concession, with no sufficient representation or detrimental reliance established; the notification was valid as to that class and could be withdrawn. en-us Tue, 04 Sep 1990 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 18 Sep 2013 18:35:02 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=156371 A later notification under the Haryana General Sales Tax Act could not retrospectively curtail an exemption already granted to tiny industrial units where the beneficiaries had altered their position by setting up units on that assurance. Promissory estoppel applied because the exemption was conferred by executive notification under delegated power, and no overriding legislative change or equitable basis for withdrawal was shown. The notification was therefore unenforceable against that class. By contrast, khadi and village industries were treated as a different category of concession, with no sufficient representation or detrimental reliance established; the notification was valid as to that class and could be withdrawn. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Tue, 04 Sep 1990 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=156371