Omission of Rule 96(10) of the CGST Rules raised whether...

Omission of Rule 96(10) of the CGST Rules raised whether proceedings pending under the deleted provision could continue. The court applied the saving clause doctrine, reasoning that continuance of proceedings after omission is permissible only if a saving clause exists; in the absence of any saving clause the pending proceedings lapse. This conclusion is stated subject to the General Clauses Act and specifically Section 6 of that Act. Writ petitions were allowed, resulting in setting aside of the impugned assessment orders.