Karnataka HC held that omitted Rule 96(10) of CGST Rules cannot apply to pending refund proceedings without a saving clause.
Omitted CGST Rule 96(10) Inapplicable to Pending Refunds
The Karnataka High Court dismissed the Revenue’s appeal and held that the omitted Rule 96(10) of the CGST Rules, which dealt with refund processing, does not continue to apply to pending refund proceedings in the absence of a saving clause.
Following the decision in Goodluck India Pvt. Ltd. v. CCE, the court ruled that once a rule is omitted, it ceases to have effect unless expressly preserved. Pending proceedings cannot be governed by defunct procedural rules.
A rule omitted without a saving clause cannot be invoked to determine rights in pending proceedings.
This decision ensures procedural fairness and upholds the principle of legality in tax administration. It benefits taxpayers with pending refunds by removing reliance on withdrawn procedural restrictions. Authorities must process refunds under currently applicable rules.
Citations
- Rule 96(10), CGST Rules
- Goodluck India Pvt. Ltd. v. CCE
