(1.) THIS is a petition for refund of an amount of Rs.73,56,664.08, allegedly charged in excess of legally recoverable amount as Excise Duty and interest at the rate of 21 % on the sum as also to permit the petitioner to clear ordinary Portland Cement till 29.8.90 at 50% of rate of duty. The petitioner contends that acting on a representation made in a Press Note issued by Government of India publishing decision of Govt. of India to the effect that capacity for the mini cement plant will be limited to 200 tons per day or 66,000/ - P.A. and Mini Cement Plant would be all -oted a rebate in the payment of excise duty upto 50% for a period of 5 years their factory was set up. It was further contended that in the Press Note it was also represented that the Government hope that with the present announcement of an attractive price as well as liberal incentives, Enterpreanuers will come forward to set up as many Cement Plants as possible in the Country within the shortest possible time. According to the petitioners they established a Mini Cement plant acting on the representation made in the aforesaid Press Note but the Govt. of India has resiled from its policy decision which it cannot be allowed to do on the principles of Promissory Estoppel.
(2.) 1991 ELT 178) and Prominent Cement Ltd. v. U.O.I. (1992 (1) M.P.J.R. 242) has taken a view that the doctrine of promissory estoppel does not apply where the promise or the representation is to change the existing statutory position. As the same Press Note and the representation were the subject matter of the aforesaid two cases decided by two Division Benches of this Court, the present case before us is squarely covered by the aforesaid two decisions. We have no reasons to differ from the view taken in the aforesaid decisions. The disposal of this case has, therefore, to be in accordance with aforesaid two judgments. The petition is, therefore, dismissed. There shall be no orders as the costs. The security deposit, if any, be refunded.