UNION OF INDIA MINISTRY OF INDUSTRIES REP BY ITS SECRETARY vs M/S MEGHALAYA STEELS AND CONCRETE PRODUCTS LTD. — C.A. No. 1914/2009
Case under Section XIV-A. Status: Disposed.
CNR: SCIN010308082006
Filing Date
24-Nov-2006
Registration No
C.A. No. 1914/2009
Diary Number
30808/2006
Order Date
26-Oct-2017
Document Type
ROP - of Main Case
Disposal Type
Dismissed
Last updated 02-Jul-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.UNION OF INDIA MINISTRY OF INDUSTRIES REP BY ITS SECRETARY
Adv. B. KRISHNA PRASAD
Respondent(s)
-
1.M/S MEGHALAYA STEELS AND CONCRETE PRODUCTS LTD.
Adv. RAMESHWAR PRASAD GOYAL
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
26-Oct-2017
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
26-Oct-2017
Ordinary
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ranjan Gogoi and Hon'ble Mr. Justice Navin Sinha
-
25-Oct-2017
Ordinary
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ranjan Gogoi and Hon'ble Mr. Justice Navin Sinha
-
24-Oct-2017
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
12-May-2015
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
12-May-2015
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
10-Mar-2015
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
10-Mar-2015
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
04-Sep-2014
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
04-Sep-2014
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
03-Sep-2014
Office Report - of Main CaseView PDF
-
29-Aug-2013
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
10-May-2013
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
20-Mar-2009
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
10-Dec-2008
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
05-Aug-2008
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
07-Jul-2008
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
11-Apr-2008
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
13-Mar-2008
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
31-Jan-2008
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
15-Jan-2008
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
14-Nov-2007
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
22-Aug-2007
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
23-Feb-2007
ROPView PDF
-
24-Nov-2006
Case filed
Registration No. C.A. No. 1914/2009
Summary of C.A. No. 1914/2009 The Supreme Court reversed the High Court's decision granting Meghalaya Steels central excise duty exemption from its production date (July 14, 1999). The Court ruled that while the Union of India fully honored its promised 10-year exemption, it correctly began from the notification date extending exemption to Meghalaya (March 1, 2000), not retrospectively from production. The Court held the Doctrine of Promissory Estoppel was inapplicable since no benefit was withdrawn or partially granted. The parties were left to adjust accounts between revenue and assessee, with the respondent liable for duty from July 1999 to March 2000 and entitled to refunds for July 2009 to March 2010. All related appeals (1915-1918 of 2009) were closed accordingly. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts