Proceedings Under Omitted CGST Rules 89(4B), 96(10) Lapse Absent Saving Clause or Section 6 Protection

HC held that the challenge to the vires of Rules 89(4B) and 96(10) of the CGST Rules, 2017 is fully governed by its earlier decision in a connected batch of matters. Applying that ratio, the Court held that upon omission of the impugned Rules by Notification dated 08.10.2024, and in the absence of any saving clause or recourse to Section 6 of the General Clauses Act, all non-finalised proceedings (including pending show cause notices and appeals) based solely on those Rules do not survive and lapse. The petition is accordingly treated as covered by that view and is listed for directions/disposal on 02.12.2025.

---

---

The petitioner's counsel submitted that the writ petition is "squarely covered" by the decision in *Hikal Ltd. & Ors. vs. Union of India & Ors.*, 2025 (9) TMI 806, and subsequent orders following that judgment, including *Aarti Drugs Ltd. vs. Union of India & Ors.*, 2025 (10) TMI 322 (Bom). On this basis, the petitioner seeks similar relief without independent adjudication on the merits, relying on the ratio already laid down in those matters. Counsel for the State authorities and the Union of India requested time to verify whether the present case is indeed governed by the cited precedents. The Court accepted this request and adjourned the matter, directing that it be listed for directions/disposal on 2 December 2025. Multiple connected writ petitions, identified by their numbers, were ordered to be heard along with the present petition on the same date for coordinated direction/disposal.

---