https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=212719 Promissory estoppel did not bar the State from retrospectively withdrawing deferment benefits for the liquor industry under the sales tax deferment scheme. The benefit formed part of subordinate legislation, and the court held that the doctrine cannot prevent correction of a mistaken representation where the State acts in overriding public interest. Relying on Article 47 and the State policy against encouraging liquor trade, the court found that health and public policy considerations prevailed. The omission of liquor from the negative list was treated as a mistake, and the retrospective amendment placing liquor in that list was upheld as a valid policy correction. en-us Mon, 13 Jun 2011 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 04 Oct 2014 15:26:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=212719 Promissory estoppel did not bar the State from retrospectively withdrawing deferment benefits for the liquor industry under the sales tax deferment scheme. The benefit formed part of subordinate legislation, and the court held that the doctrine cannot prevent correction of a mistaken representation where the State acts in overriding public interest. Relying on Article 47 and the State policy against encouraging liquor trade, the court found that health and public policy considerations prevailed. The omission of liquor from the negative list was treated as a mistake, and the retrospective amendment placing liquor in that list was upheld as a valid policy correction. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Mon, 13 Jun 2011 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=212719