https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=194023 The Division Bench allowed the appeal, finding that the notification withdrawing excise duty exemption on pan masala products was barred by the doctrine of promissory estoppel. The appellant had relied on promises made under earlier notifications, leading to significant investments. The court directed the respondents to refund the excise duty component to the appellant based on entitlement under the law, emphasizing the importance of honoring government promises to investors. The decision highlighted the legal principle of protecting legitimate expectations through the application of promissory estoppel. en-us Wed, 25 May 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 26 Aug 2017 10:20:58 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=194023 The Division Bench allowed the appeal, finding that the notification withdrawing excise duty exemption on pan masala products was barred by the doctrine of promissory estoppel. The appellant had relied on promises made under earlier notifications, leading to significant investments. The court directed the respondents to refund the excise duty component to the appellant based on entitlement under the law, emphasizing the importance of honoring government promises to investors. The decision highlighted the legal principle of protecting legitimate expectations through the application of promissory estoppel. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 25 May 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=194023