2026-VIL-526-CAL

SGST High Court Cases

GST - Effect of omission of Rule 96(10) of CGST Rules, 2017 on pending proceedings - Refund of IGST on exports made under Advance Authorisation licenses between October 2017 and March 2022 - Authorities issued notice alleging contravention of Rule 96(10) of the CGST Rules, 2017, which prescribed restrictions on claiming refund of integrated tax paid on exports for persons who had availed exemption notifications on procurement of inputs. Subsequently, the Notification No. 20/2024 dated 08.10.2024, omitting Rule 96(10) from the statute - Whether pending proceedings initiated under Rule 96(10) of the CGST Rules can be continued and concluded after the Rule has been omitted from the statute by notification dated 8th October, 2024, in the absence of any saving clause – HELD - Once the Rule 96(10) has been omitted, all pending proceedings based on contravention of that Rule must stand closed and cannot be continued. The Section 6 of the General Clauses Act applies only to repeals of Central Acts or Regulations and not to omissions of Rules. Consequently, when a Rule is omitted without any saving clause, no proceedings can be instituted or continued in respect of alleged contraventions of that Rule. The omission operates prospectively and affects all pending proceedings that have not reached finality. The Courts in Kolhapur Canesugar Works Ltd., Hikal Limited, and Addwrap Packaging cases, consistently held that following omission of a Rule, all pending proceedings including undisposed show-cause notices and orders not yet finalized stand lapsed. Since the Notification omitting Rule 96(10) does not contain any saving clause to preserve pending proceedings, such proceedings cannot survive the omission – The impugned notice and orders are quashed and the writ petition is allowed

Create Account



Log In



Forgot Password


Please Note: This facility is only for Subscribing Members.

Email this page



Feedback this page