Summary
The Court set aside GST orders that relied on Rule 96(10) of the CGST Rules. The rule was omitted by Notification No. 20/2024-Central Tax with effect from 8 October 2024 and without a saving clause, so pending proceedings could not continue. The Court followed the Supreme Court in Goodluck India and a CBIC Office Memorandum.
What it means for you
Exporters facing IGST-refund recovery under Rule 96(10) should have pending notices and orders reviewed.
This summary is general information, not legal advice. The outcome of any case depends on its facts; read the source and take advice before acting.
More India updates
- GST notice generated in time but uploaded late due to portal glitch is time-barred2026 · Delhi High Court
- Section 74 GST demand fails if fraud allegations don't name suppliers and transactions2026 · Delhi High Court
- ₹38.47 crore disallowance u/s 40(a)(ia) deleted — Form 26A delayed by portal glitches2026 · ITAT Bangalore
- Retrospective JAO–FAO amendment struck down2026 · Punjab & Haryana High Court
- Form 26AS mismatch alone can't justify a rental income addition2026 · ITAT Mumbai