https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=45898 Delay in issuing a Customs Act notification could not defeat an importer's entitlement to concessional duty where the export-import policy, issued under statutory authority for a fixed period, promised that concession and the importer had acted on it by obtaining the licence and importing capital goods. The later differential duty demand arose only because the notification was delayed; that delay was treated as a ministerial lapse and not a basis to deny the policy benefit. The authorities were found to have acted contrary to the Government's own policy, and promissory estoppel applied on these facts to prevent withdrawal of the concession. en-us Thu, 22 Jun 2000 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 07 Aug 2018 10:59:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=45898 Delay in issuing a Customs Act notification could not defeat an importer's entitlement to concessional duty where the export-import policy, issued under statutory authority for a fixed period, promised that concession and the importer had acted on it by obtaining the licence and importing capital goods. The later differential duty demand arose only because the notification was delayed; that delay was treated as a ministerial lapse and not a basis to deny the policy benefit. The authorities were found to have acted contrary to the Government's own policy, and promissory estoppel applied on these facts to prevent withdrawal of the concession. Case-Laws Customs Thu, 22 Jun 2000 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=45898