https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=95841 The principal issue was whether the appellant's MM Plant qualified as a "new industrial unit" under the 1989 industrial policy rather than an expansion of an existing unit. Applying the policy's eligibility criteria for new units and noting the absence of cogent reasons to treat it as an expansion (including prior official classification as a new unit), the unit was held to be a new industrial unit, entitling it to incentives. The further issue was whether subsidies could be denied due to exhaustion of overall subsidy limits under earlier policies; this restriction was held applicable only to existing units seeking additional subsidy for expansion/modernisation/diversification, so rejection was unlawful. Based on clear representations and detrimental reliance, the State was held estopped from refusing disbursal; the HC order was set aside and subsidies directed. - SC en-us Thu, 08 Jan 2026 08:22:07 +0530 Thu, 08 Jan 2026 08:22:07 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=95841 The principal issue was whether the appellant's MM Plant qualified as a "new industrial unit" under the 1989 industrial policy rather than an expansion of an existing unit. Applying the policy's eligibility criteria for new units and noting the absence of cogent reasons to treat it as an expansion (including prior official classification as a new unit), the unit was held to be a new industrial unit, entitling it to incentives. The further issue was whether subsidies could be denied due to exhaustion of overall subsidy limits under earlier policies; this restriction was held applicable only to existing units seeking additional subsidy for expansion/modernisation/diversification, so rejection was unlawful. Based on clear representations and detrimental reliance, the State was held estopped from refusing disbursal; the HC order was set aside and subsidies directed. - SC Highlights Indian Laws Thu, 08 Jan 2026 08:22:07 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=95841