<?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>1989 (9) TMI 119 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=42780</link>
    <description>Promissory estoppel can bind the Government where a tax concession notification induces a party to alter its position and complete project investments in reliance on the representation. A later policy change, by itself, is insufficient to justify withdrawal; the Government must show overriding public interest with proper supporting material. The fact that the concession was granted through delegated or subordinate legislation does not exclude estoppel in such circumstances. On these facts, the withdrawal notification was held unsustainable because no adequate public-interest basis was established for unilateral revocation of the excise concession.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 11 Sep 1989 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 14 Jun 2010 12:22:15 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=81309" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1989 (9) TMI 119 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=42780</link>
      <description>Promissory estoppel can bind the Government where a tax concession notification induces a party to alter its position and complete project investments in reliance on the representation. A later policy change, by itself, is insufficient to justify withdrawal; the Government must show overriding public interest with proper supporting material. The fact that the concession was granted through delegated or subordinate legislation does not exclude estoppel in such circumstances. On these facts, the withdrawal notification was held unsustainable because no adequate public-interest basis was established for unilateral revocation of the excise concession.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 11 Sep 1989 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=42780</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>