Case Law Details
Hero Motocorp Ltd. Vs Union of India (Delhi High Court)
Budgetary Support Scheme – Plea of Promissory Estoppel not enforceable
Facts – Petition filed against the Budgetary Support Scheme. Case of the Petitioner is that the erstwhile area based exemptions got rescinded with the introduction of the GST Regime w.e.f. 1.7.2017. Though Budgetary Support Scheme notified in by the Government to mitigate such difficulties, the benefits were substantially lesser than that enjoyed during the area based exemption regime. In these circumstances, the Petitioner has preferred the writ petition for grant of complete exemption by way of reimbursement of the amount of CGST & IGST for the residual period of exemption notification dated 10.06.2003, that granted 100% exemption on excise duty and adherence of Industrial Policy.
Decision of the Hon’ble High Court: The Hon’ble High Court while dismissing the Writ Petition held as under
What clearly emerges from the decisions taken note of is that the plea of promissory estoppel cannot be enforced against an act done in accordance with the statutory provisions of law. Under Section 174(2)(c) of the CGST Act, express provision has been made by the Parliament to provide that any tax exemption granted as an incentive against investment through a notification under, inter alia, the erstwhile Central Excise Act, shall not continue as a privilege if the said notification is rescinded, and in the present case, the notification which granted 100% excise duty exemption was, in fact, rescinded. Thus, in the absence of any challenge by the Petitioner to the rescission of the said notification which granted exemption or to the vires of the proviso to Section 174(2)(c) of the CGST Act, no plea of
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
