https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=295364 The Supreme Court upheld subsequent excise-related industrial notifications as clarificatory measures issued in public interest and for revenue protection, finding that they furthered the original incentive scheme and did not defeat any vested right. On that basis, the Court rejected challenges based on promissory estoppel, retrospectivity and arbitrariness, and sustained Notifications No. 16/2008-C.E. and 33/2008-C.E. The earlier High Court rulings quashing the notifications were set aside, while refunds already granted before the impugned notifications were left undisturbed and pending refund claims were directed to be decided under the upheld regime on merits. en-us Wed, 22 Apr 2020 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 18 Feb 2025 17:52:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=295364 The Supreme Court upheld subsequent excise-related industrial notifications as clarificatory measures issued in public interest and for revenue protection, finding that they furthered the original incentive scheme and did not defeat any vested right. On that basis, the Court rejected challenges based on promissory estoppel, retrospectivity and arbitrariness, and sustained Notifications No. 16/2008-C.E. and 33/2008-C.E. The earlier High Court rulings quashing the notifications were set aside, while refunds already granted before the impugned notifications were left undisturbed and pending refund claims were directed to be decided under the upheld regime on merits. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 22 Apr 2020 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=295364