Court grants challenge to Rule 96(10) of GST Rules, halts coercive actions, schedules urgent hearing

The Court has granted the petitioner's request to challenge Rule 96(10) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Rules, seeking to pay Integrated Tax on exported goods and claim refunds. Proceedings against the petitioner have been quashed, and interim relief has been provided to halt coercive recovery actions. The Court has acknowledged the urgency in pending matters and scheduled a hearing for related cases, allowing parties to exchange submissions and approach the Court if needed. The judgment demonstrates a thorough consideration of legal aspects and aims to resolve the issues fairly and promptly.

---

---

Issues:
Challenge to Rule 96(10) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Rules, entitlement to pay Integrated Tax on exported goods and claim refund, quashing of proceedings initiated against the petitioner, interim relief sought, urgency in pending matters.

Analysis:
The petitioner has approached the Court seeking to challenge Rule 96(10) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017, and has requested the issuance of a writ of mandamus or any appropriate writ to strike down the said rule as ultra vires various provisions of the IGST Act, CGST Act, and the Constitution of India. Additionally, the petitioner seeks a declaration to pay Integrated Tax on goods exported and claim a refund of such tax paid under specific sections of the IGST Act, 2017. The petitioner also requests the Court to quash proceedings initiated against them and seeks interim relief to restrain coercive recovery actions until the next hearing date.

The Court has heard the petitioner's advocate, Mr. Paritosh Gupta, who has highlighted the similarity of the issue with other cases previously addressed by the Court. Notice has been issued, making the matter returnable on a specified date. The petitioner has also requested interim relief, stating that no recovery should be made on the tax paid for goods exported and refunded until a certain date. The Court has acknowledged the urgency in addressing pending matters from 2019 and has scheduled a hearing for multiple related cases on the same date.

Both parties have been directed to exchange written submissions and authorities to be relied upon. The petitioner has been granted the liberty to approach the Court before the scheduled date. Direct service and service by speed post have been permitted for effective communication in the case. The Court has ensured that all necessary steps are taken to facilitate a fair and efficient resolution of the matter.

This judgment reflects a comprehensive analysis of the issues raised by the petitioner, considering the legal framework and previous precedents. The Court's directions aim to address the petitioner's concerns while ensuring a fair and timely resolution of the case, taking into account the urgency and complexity of the matter at hand.

---