IMPORTANT POINT
The issue of an estoppel by conduct can only be said to be available in the event of there being a precise and unambiguous representation and on that score a further question arises as to whether there was any unequivocal assurance prompting the assured to alter his position or status.

Headnote:(i) International Price Reimbursement Scheme-Condition precedent to avail reimbursement-Object of scheme-Scheme to provide protection to exporters of Engineering goods who would otherwise by reason of user of domestic steel costing higher than international steel from sufference of loss-Actual payment of domestic price i.e. JPC price which includes a number of levies rendering it more than international price is a must to claim reimbursement-An exporter who consumed steel manufactured by it and not paid JPC price cannot claim reimbursement-Appellant had been captively consuming steel manufacture by it getting reimbursement-Subsequent notice by Government for repayment-Valid-Principles of estoppel by conduct not applicable in view of undertaking given by appellant to refund erroneous or excess claim and receipt of reimbursement.
       Under the International Price Reimbursement Scheme (IPRS) supplies of steel raw materials required by the Engineering exporters were made available at the International prices by reimbursing the difference between the JPC prices and the relevant international prices. The expression used is reimbursement to the extent of the difference between the domestic and international prices and in the event of non-payment thereof question of thus claiming any price difference would not arise as otherwise it would amount to obtaining double benefit - This has been the contention of both Attorney General of India as also the Additional - Solicitor General of India appearing for the respondents. (Para 14)
       Admittedly, Tata Iron has not paid the JPC price which includes a number of levies rendering it more than the international prices but the factum of non-payment of the levies, since the materials in question have been consumed at the factory itself without payment of any duty, the submissions of the respondent seems to have been placed at a rather stronger footing. In common acceptation the word reimburse mean and imply to pay back or refund : As a matter of fact it denotes restoration of something paid in excess: as regards the respondent Union of India it cannot but mean to indemnify having regard to the common grammatical meaning of the word reimbursement . Reimbursement has to mean and imply restoration of an equivalent for something paid or expended. Reimbursement pre-supposes previous payment. The contextual facts depict that the intention of the Government while framing the IPRS was to protect the interest of exporters of the engineering goods where the JPC or the domestic price (which includes a number of levies) was more than the international pricing. The appellant TISCO admittedly has not paid the JPC price which includes various levies of the raw materials used for the product. As a matter of fact they cannot have any reimbursement for expenses which they have never incurred. As per the calculation made by the respondents an amount of Rs. 10,37,96,604/- is recoverable from TISCO on account of over payment of which a sum of Rs. 6,75,00,298/- stands adjusted by the Union of India against the payments respectively and a balance amount of Rs. 3,62,96,306/- is yet to be recovered as contended by the respondents. On a true reading of the Scheme and various clauses thereunder together with the available meaning on the basis of the language used, the IPRS Scheme cannot possibly cover a situation as is in the present context. We are afraid that in the event the appellant is permitted and allowed to enjoy the benefits in terms of the scheme, the situation would be rather not only of unjust enrichment but entertainment of a totally wrong claim. (Paras 15 to 18)
       The issue of an estoppel by conduct can only be said to be available in the event of there being a precise and unambiguous representation and on that score a further question arises as to whether there was any unequivocal assurance prompting the assured to alter his position or status. (Para 21)
       In the instant case the appellant had given an undertaking to refund for any amount erroneously paid or paid in excess and as such question of there being any estoppel would not arise. (Paras 21 and 22)
       (ii) Doctrine of estoppel-Estoppel by conduct-Issue of an estoppel by conduct can only be said to be available in the event of there being a precise and unambiguous representation. (Para 21)

JUDGMENT

Banerjee, J.-Leave granted.

2. This appeal against the judgment of the High Court at Calcutta is addressed on two counts : The first involving the true purport of International Price Reimbursement Scheme (IPRS) as introduced by the Government of India and the second pertains to the doctrine of estoppel by conduct.

Background Facts :

3. By the Government Notification No. SC (A)-24 (113)/63 dated 29.2.1964 issued by the Department of Iron & Steel in the Ministry of Steel, Mines and Heavy Engineering, the Government of India to give effect to the proposal for fixation of steel prices for de-controlled categories, constituted the Joint Plant Committee consisting of representatives of all major producers of steel along with Government representative. It is the Joint Plant Committee (hereinafter referred to as JPC ) with whose concurrence, the main producers, being its members control the prices of similar categories of steel, though however, the same is restrictive in its application and is made applicable to supplies effected by the main steel producers only, viz. Tata Iron & Steel Co. Ltd., Indian Iron & Steel Co. Ltd. and Hindustan Steel Ltd. - (Presently Steel Authority of India Ltd.).

4. The records depict that consequent on the increase in excise duty in steel materials under Government of India Notification dated 17th March, 1972, the prices of steel materials were directed to be inclusive of JPC contribution to the re-roller Freight Differential Fund, Equalised Freight Element and provision for JPC Engineering Goods Export Assistance Fund. The inclusion of the above were made applicable to various categories of materials including Bar, Rods, Slabs Blooms, Coil, Billets etc. as appears from JPC announcement No.81 dated March 20, 1972. It is, however, significant to note that by reason of the inclusion of the JPC price elements as above, the domestic price for iron and steel materials has always been higher than the international price of steel and resultantly demand for imported steel rather than the indigenous manufacture was on an ascending trend and it is to combat and curb such a trend and having regard to the higher domestic price structure, the Government of India introduced the International Price Reimbursement Scheme (hereinafter referred to as the Scheme") so as to provide some protection to exporters of engineering goods who would otherwise by reason of user of domestic steel, would be exposed to an additional expenditure and thus suffer a loss for the price difference as noticed above. Incidentally, be it noted that the protection scheme came into force by reason of the price increase effected on 9.2.1981 by the Government of India, Ministry of Commerce Notification dated 23rd July, 1981. One redeeming feature of the Scheme however, is reimbursement (emphasised) and it is in this context that Clauses 2.4, 2.5. 2.7., 2,8 of the Scheme are relevant and thus ought to be noticed in extenso and relevant extracts of which are as below :

2.4. Supplies of Steel made under release orders issued by Iron & Steel Controller will be made at the prevailing plant/stockyard price. After the export are effected, price difference between its "domestic price" and the relevant "international price" will be reimbursed to the exporter. Contracts eligible for reimbursement under this scheme (including fresh contracts) would have to be got registered with the concerned Regional Office of the EEPC within 45 days from the date of the contract.

2.5. For reimbursement purposes, the "domestic price" for these categories would be the JPC plant price for those categories where JPC price control exists and SAIL price for other items prevailing on the date of exports. The domestic price will be exclusive of taxes like sales tax, octroi, etc.

2.7. Procedure for Reimbursement :

(A) The application for reimbursement will be made to the Regional Offices of the EEPC, with whom the exporter is registered;

(B) The f

Click Here to Read the rest of this document