Topic
The Orissa High Court struck down the August 18, 2020 resolution withdrawing SGST reimbursement for cement units under IPR 2015, calling it arbitrary and unconstitutional. The ruling safeguards investors who had undertaken substantial investments based on the original incentive, reinforcing the doctrine of legitimate expectation.
The Bombay High Court held that once the state encourages industries to invest through a clear incentive scheme, it cannot later withdraw those benefits retroactively, even via a subsequent resolution. This reinforces the doctrine of promissory estoppel as a shield against arbitrary state conduct, protecting entrepreneurs who act in good faith on official assurances.
The Himachal Pradesh High Court mandates that industries which paid higher electricity duty under a now-amended notification are entitled to automatic adjustment of the excess amount against future duty liabilities. This ruling ensures compliance with the state’s industrial policy and prevents unjust enrichment by the revenue department, directly benefiting eligible industrial units under the 2019 Investment Policy.
Chhattisgarh High Court rules that tax incentives under pre-GST state policies continue post-CGST enactment unless explicitly rescinded, quashing the denial of VAT/CST refunds to Abis Exports. The judgment reinforces that fiscal incentives are protected under statutory savings provisions, mandating reconsideration of claims within 60 days.
MP High Court upholds lease cancellation where the lessee failed to commence industrial production within stipulated timelines, despite multiple extensions. The ruling reinforces that contractual obligations under industrial leases are binding, and non-compliance can lead to termination without violating Article 19(1)(g) rights.