Commercial vehicle depreciation, scientifically determined warranty provisions and exempt-income disallowances were resolved in favour of the taxpayer...
HC held that, consequent to the omission of Rule 96(10) of the CGST Rules w.e.f. 08.10.2024 and its inconsistency with s.16 of the IGST Act, no proceedings can validly continue under the said rule. All pending SCNs, consequential orders and appeals founded on Rule 96(10) were held to be non-sustainable, as the omission must operate to the benefit of all assessees in ongoing matters. In the present case, proceedings were only at the summons stage; hence, the HC quashed the summons, the SCN and all subsequent orders arising therefrom. The petitioner, having already made the additional 10% pre-deposit while pursuing appellate remedies, is entitled to refund/relief without being subjected to any further action under the omitted Rule 96(10). The writ petition was accordingly allowed.
HC held that, consequent to the omission of Rule 96(10) of the CGST Rules w.e.f. 08.10.2024 and its inconsistency with s.16 of the IGST Act, no proceedings can validly continue under the said rule. All pending SCNs, consequential orders and appeals founded on Rule 96(10) were held to be non-sustainable, as the omission must operate to the benefit of all assessees in ongoing matters. In the present case, proceedings were only at the summons stage; hence, the HC quashed the summons, the SCN and all subsequent orders arising therefrom. The petitioner, having already made the additional 10% pre-deposit while pursuing appellate remedies, is entitled to refund/relief without being subjected to any further action under the omitted Rule 96(10). The writ petition was accordingly allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
