2026-VIL-75-SC

SGST Supreme Court Cases

GST - Refund of IGST exports of goods and services - Omission of Rule 96(10) - Applicability to pending proceedings - Petitioner claimed refund of IGST paid on goods and services exported out of India. Rule 96(10) of CGST Rules 2017 was omitted by Notification No. 20/2024 effective 08.10.2024 which imposed restrictions on refund claims - High Court held omission applies to all pending proceedings - Whether omission of Rule 96(10) without saving clause applies to pending proceedings or only prospectively - HELD - Constitution Bench principle in Kolhapur Canesugar Works case holds that omission of a Rule obliterates it from statute completely as if it never existed. General Clauses Act Section 6 applies only to Central Acts or regulations not to Rules. When Rule is omitted without saving clause or provision for continuance of initiated proceedings, the omission applies to all pending proceedings - The GST Council recommendation for prospective application is only advisory and not mandatory. Legislature's intention to omit Rule 96(10) without saving clause was to end unnecessary complications once and for all including in pending proceedings not to keep complications alive. High Court judgment well-reasoned and no interference warranted. Omission of Rule 96(10) applies to all pending proceedings without restriction on refund claims previously imposed by Rule 96(10) – There are many proceedings pending before the various High Courts and conflicting decisions have also been passed. The Bench hopes that such proceedings would get closure with this judgment - The appeals are dismissed

Create Account



Log In



Forgot Password


Please Note: This facility is only for Subscribing Members.

Email this page



Feedback this page