https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=778977 HC dismissed the writ petition and refused promissory estoppel relief. The court held the unit that received full exemption under Clause 5(a) of the Notification could not be treated as an existing unit eligible for additional exemption on substantial expansion under Clause 5(b). Exemptions are strictly construed in favour of revenue; a new unit's full-investment exemption is not equivalent to successive expansion benefits available to existing units. Having accepted part of the notification's benefit, the petitioner cannot collaterally challenge other parts, and no interference was warranted. en-us Wed, 24 Sep 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 26 Sep 2025 08:26:56 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=778977 HC dismissed the writ petition and refused promissory estoppel relief. The court held the unit that received full exemption under Clause 5(a) of the Notification could not be treated as an existing unit eligible for additional exemption on substantial expansion under Clause 5(b). Exemptions are strictly construed in favour of revenue; a new unit's full-investment exemption is not equivalent to successive expansion benefits available to existing units. Having accepted part of the notification's benefit, the petitioner cannot collaterally challenge other parts, and no interference was warranted. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 24 Sep 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=778977