https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=310467 State reservation of power to change its liquor settlement policy prevented licensees from treating earlier grant and renewal arrangements as an enforceable promise. The auction-cum-tender policy was presented as a public-interest measure to curb monopolistic tendencies and protect revenue. Promissory estoppel did not apply because no enforceable promise or detrimental change of position was established. Sections 42 and 43 of the Bihar Excise Act did not govern this policy change, and the arbitrariness challenge failed. The policy challenge was rejected, while licensees remained entitled to return of National Saving Certificates furnished as security. en-us Tue, 31 Mar 1992 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 26 Oct 2023 15:21:16 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=310467 State reservation of power to change its liquor settlement policy prevented licensees from treating earlier grant and renewal arrangements as an enforceable promise. The auction-cum-tender policy was presented as a public-interest measure to curb monopolistic tendencies and protect revenue. Promissory estoppel did not apply because no enforceable promise or detrimental change of position was established. Sections 42 and 43 of the Bihar Excise Act did not govern this policy change, and the arbitrariness challenge failed. The policy challenge was rejected, while licensees remained entitled to return of National Saving Certificates furnished as security. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 31 Mar 1992 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=310467