2026 (8) TMI 719

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Nos. 26350-26391/2026], Civil Appeal No. 10307 of 2026 [@ Special Leave Petition (C) No.26344 of 2026], Civil Appeal No. 10308 of 2026 [@ Special Leave Petition (C) No. 26345 of 2026],  Civil Appeal No, 10309 of 2026 [@ Special Leave Petition (C) No.10125 of 2026], Civil Appeal Nos.  10344-10428 of 2026 [@ Special Leave Petition (C) Nos. 26597-26681 of 2026], Civil Appeal No. 10310 of 2026 [@ Special Leave Petition (C) No. 26346 of 2026], Civil Appeal No. 10311 of 2026 [@ Special Leave Petition (C) No. 26337 of 2026], Civil Appeal Nos. 10312-10315 of 2026 [@ Special Leave Petition (C) Nos. 15317-15320 of 2026], Civil Appeal Nos. 10316-10317 of 2026 [@ Special Leave Petition (C) Nos. 26686-26687 of 2026], Civil Appeal No. 10318 of ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Mr. L Badri Narayanan, Adv., Ms. Nitum Jain, Adv., Ms. Neha Choudhary, Adv., Mr. Swastik Mishra, Adv., Ms. Medha Sinha, Adv., Mr. Sahil Parghi, Adv., Mr. Prithwiraj Choudhuri, Adv., Ms. Kausarjahan Sayed, Adv., Mr. Sujoy Chatterjee, AOR M/S Mps Legal, AOR Mr. Jay Savla, Sr. Adv., Mr. Prakash Shah, Sr. Adv., Mr. Mihir Mehta, Adv., Mr. Jas Sanghavi, Adv., Mr. Mohit Raval, Adv., Ms. Linzy Sharan, Adv., Mr. Anirudh Jamwal, Adv., Mr. Aditya Bajaj, Adv., Mr. Vikas Poojary, Adv., Mr. Jasdeep Singh Dhillon, Adv., Ms. Kenisha Savla, Adv., Mr. Prabhat Chaurasia, Adv., Mr. Santosh Krishnan, AOR Mr. Bharat Raichandani, Adv., Mr. Aneesh Mittal, AOR Mr. Deepak Kumar Khokhar, Adv., Mr. Mahesh Raichandani, Adv., Ms. Komal Mittal, Adv., Mr. Chaitanya G. Tr....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....atters. 3. The issue arising is whether sub-rule (10) of Rule 96 as omitted by Notification No.20/2024 with effect from 08.10.2024 would inure to the benefit of the assessee in the pending proceedings, wherein there was a claim of refund of integrated tax paid on goods and services exported out of India, to be considered without the restriction under sub-rule (10) being applied. The sub-rule having been omitted, suffice it to notice that the applicability of refund under Rule 96 was without the rigor of the person claiming such refund, having received supplies after availing benefits available by virtue of the notifications specified in clause (a) or the benefits available under the notifications specified under clause (b). The sub-rule ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... though prevalent at the time of issuance of show cause notice, before the final order was passed, it stood omitted. The newly brought in rule did not have provision for enforcing such refund. It was argued for the Department that the introduction of Section 11A, created a fiction by virtue of which proceedings under Rule 10 are deemed to be proceedings under Rule 11A of the Act. The trite principle in common law that the effect of repealing a statute or deleting a provision, is to obliterate it from the statute book, as completely as if it had never existed was highlighted by this Court. An exemption, as engrafted by the provisions of Section 6 of the General Clauses Act; though Section 6 was held to be not applicable in the given circumst....