TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1996 (8) TMI 445
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r consideration is whether the principle of promissory estoppel applies to the facts of this case. The facts are as under: The appellants owned two sugar factories at Daurala and Mawana (Meerut) and at both these factories the business of manufacturing and selling of sugar by vacuum pan process was carried on. The Central Government promulgated the Sugar (Control) Order on June 10, 1966 under which the sale of sugar by producers was controlled. In order to mitigate the hardship caused to the sugar industry in the establishment of new sugar factories and for effecting substantial expansions in the existing sugar factories, the Government sanctioned a scheme in November 1975, providing incentives to the new sugar factories and also to thos....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....stries who were otherwise entitled to the benefit of the scheme announced in the year 1975. The appellants after completing the expansion projects at the two places on August 6, 1980 and August 13, 1980, applied for necessary eligibility certificate for additional free-sale sugar entitlements as per the incentives announced. The respondents allowed the incentives as per the revised 1980 scheme. However, the appellants asserted that the incentives as per the scheme announced in the year 1975 must be given to them. The respondents did not accede to this claim of the appellants. Aggrieved by that they moved the High Court for the issue of a writ of mandamus directing the first respondent to issue a supplementary eligibility certificate for ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ol order, submitted that during the period when there was no control of sale of sugar by the producers, the producers were enabled to sell their hundred per cent of that production in the open market and the benefit flowing from such decontrol changed the whole complex and, therefore, the appellants cannot be allowed to contend that the Government cannot change the scheme. We have considered the rival submissions. It is well-settled that the doctrine of promissory estoppel represents a principle evolved by equity to avoid injustice and, though commonly named promissory estoppel, it is neither in the realm of contract nor in the realm of estoppel. The basis of this doctrine is the interposition of equity which has always, proved to its fo....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....or the period from August 16, 1978 to December 17, 1979. Further if the prayer of the appellants were to be allowed, several lakhs of quintals of sugar will have to be released as incentive levy-free sugar which otherwise meant for public distribution system. We agree with the learned Judges of the High Court when they observed that the "petitioners who availed of the resulting benefit due to decontrol cannot in all fairness lay claim to be restored the benefit of the incentives in full now over again though the basic premise became non-existent. The benefit under the subsequent scheme in force from November 15, 1980, has already been accorded to them in full measure". The High Court also noticed another important factor to decline the r....