introduction of GST Act
Case Title | Adlabs Entertainment Limited Vs Union of India |
Court | Bombay High Court |
Honorable Judges | Justice R.D Dhanuka and N.R Borkar, JJ |
Citation | 2022 (1) GSTPanacea 243 HC Bombay WRIT PETITION NO.3027 OF 2018 |
Judgement Date | 24-January-2022 |
Council for Petitioner | Mr.Abhishek Rastogi, Mr.Pratyushprava Saha and Ms.Kanika Sharma |
Council for Respondent | Mr.Pradeep S. Jetly, Mr.Jitendra B. Mishra, Mr.Ram Ochani, Mr.Himanshu Takke and Mr.S.P. Bharti |
In Favor Of | Petitioner |
Section | GST Act, 2017 |
The Bombay High Court, Bench of R.D Dhanuka and N.R Borkar, JJ, held that it should continue to get the benefits under the doctrine of legitimate expectation and promissory estoppel.
FACTS OF THE CASE
The Assessee-company, set up a theme park and a water park. As part of State Govt policy, it was offered incentives such as waiver of entertainment tax, since the Assessee was heavily investing capital. Moreover, such waiver gave an advantage to the Assessee over other entities in the same line of business. Upon implementation of GST, entertainment tax was subsumed, due to which the Assessee lost the incentive of waiver of such tax . Further, it became liable to pay GST @ 18%, at par with others. The Assessee claimed that its business became unviable & was unable to return borrowed funds, while also failing to recover its capital investment. Hence the present writ seeking relief. Entertainment tax collected from visitors used to be transferred to the company to incentivise it for its investments under the older tax regime in accordance with the tourism policy of the state, 2006. The two parks were promised Rs 8 billion of incentives till 2023-2025. . Hence the present writ seeking relief.
introduction of GST Act
COURT HELD
The Hon’ble High Court held that the issue warrants examination by the Government. Chief Secretary of State Govt directed to constitute committee comprising of Principal Secretary of Finance and the Secretary of Tourism. Assessee be permitted to make representations before it. The Committee stated that the company should continue to get the benefits under the doctrine of legitimate expectation and promissory estoppel.
introduction of GST Act
ANALYSIS OF THE JUDGEMENT
From the above case we can conclude that the doctrine of promissory estoppel allows a party to recover the benefit of a promise made even if a legal contract does not exist. Therefore, the petitioner shall continue to get the benefits which it was getting before the introduction of GST Act.
Download PDF:
Adlabs Entertainment Limited
For Reference Visit: