CASE COMMENTARY- BANNARI AMMAN SUGARS LIMITED VS COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER AND OTHERS

AUTHOR – SHAILJA SINGH, STUDENT AT VIVEKANANDA INSTITUTE OF PROFESSIONAL STUDIES

Best Citation – SHAILJA SINGH, CASE COMMENTARY- BANNARI AMMAN SUGARS LIMITED VS COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER AND OTHERS, ILE CONSTITUTIONAL REVIEW, 2 (2) of 2023, Pg. 27-30, ISSN – 2583-7168.

ABSTRACT

There have been many instances in the history of our legal system where the cases of doctrine of promissory estoppel and doctrine of legitimate expectation often overlaps with each other due to the reason that both are laws of equity and based upon unambiguous and patent promises. However, sometimes the interest of the public overrides upon such clear promise or legitimate expectation. Such is the case in the Supreme Court ruled judgement- Bannari Amman Sugar Limited v. Commercial tax officer and others, wherein, it is laid down that guarding of both the doctrines should not come at the cost of dissatisfaction to the interest of public. The case law revolves around the implication of the doctrines to the facts of the case and discusses how the decision-making body can hide behind the blanket of ‘overriding public interest’.

KEYWORDS: Promissory Estoppel, Legitimate Expectation, Public interest, State, Constitution of India