The Calcutta High Court has quashed a show cause notice and consequential orders founded solely upon omitted Rule 96(10) of the CGST Rules, following the Supreme Court's recent ruling in M/s Goodluck India Ltd. vs. Union of India (SLP (C) No. 24550 of 2025, decided 06.08.2026). Justice Smita Das De, in WPA 6429 of 2025 (M/s KSE Electricals Private Limited vs. Additional Commissioner, decided 03.09.2026), held that upon omission of a provision without any saving clause, the provision ceases to exist in the eye of law and no proceedings can be initiated or continued on its basis.
Rule 96(10) had imposed conditions on exporters who had received benefits under certain advance authorisation and export promotion schemes, requiring them to not claim IGST refund on exports. The Rule was omitted with effect from 08.10.2024 by Notification No. 20/2024-Central Tax, without any saving clause. The Supreme Court in Goodluck India, relying on its Constitution Bench decision in Kolhapur Canesugar Works Ltd. vs. Union of India (2000) 2 SCC 536, held that the legislature's intention to omit the rule without any saving clause was to bring unnecessary complications to an end "once and for all" — and this intention cannot be read as keeping alive those complications for pending proceedings.
The Court also took judicial notice of the CBIC's Office Memorandum dated 24.08.2026, issued pursuant to the Supreme Court's ruling, instructing field formations not to initiate or pursue proceedings based upon the omitted Rule 96(10). The show cause notice dated 25.07.2024 under Section 74 for the period July 2017 to March 2022, along with the consequential orders dated 04.02.2025, were quashed and set aside. This ruling provides immediate relief to exporters across the country facing similar proceedings.
• 2026-juristway.com-1272-HC(Calcutta)-GST | High Court of Calcutta | WPA 6429 of 2025 | 03.09.2026