<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>1980 (4) TMI 303 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=169343</link>
    <description>Promissory estoppel cannot compel a public authority to continue an octroi exemption promised in a sale proclamation where the Municipality lacked competence to grant a permanent exemption and the State acted within the statutory scheme. An ultra vires municipal assurance does not bind later lawful exercise of statutory taxing power, and estoppel cannot override legislation, validate an unauthorised act, or prevent the Government from discharging public duties. The impugned octroi levy and the Government&#039;s approval of the municipal resolution were therefore valid, because the earlier representation could not create an enforceable bar against a levy imposed under lawful authority.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 16 Apr 1980 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 17 Jul 2025 17:11:58 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=381945" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1980 (4) TMI 303 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=169343</link>
      <description>Promissory estoppel cannot compel a public authority to continue an octroi exemption promised in a sale proclamation where the Municipality lacked competence to grant a permanent exemption and the State acted within the statutory scheme. An ultra vires municipal assurance does not bind later lawful exercise of statutory taxing power, and estoppel cannot override legislation, validate an unauthorised act, or prevent the Government from discharging public duties. The impugned octroi levy and the Government&#039;s approval of the municipal resolution were therefore valid, because the earlier representation could not create an enforceable bar against a levy imposed under lawful authority.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 16 Apr 1980 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=169343</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>