In Brief
This case concerns the validity of subsequent excise duty exemption notifications that limited refunds to actual value addition, replacing earlier notifications offering unlimited refunds for new industrial units in earthquake-affected Kutch district and North-Eastern states. The Supreme Court held that the 2008 amendments were clarificatory in nature, meant to prevent tax evasion schemes while achieving the original incentive's purpose of genuine industrialization. The Court upheld their retrospective application, finding them not hit by promissory estoppel doctrine since supervening public interest in combating tax fraud justified the modification. The earlier High Court judgments quashing these notifications were reversed, and pending refund applications were directed to be decided under the amended notifications.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.