AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
ASHWANI KUMAR MISHRA, A.C.J. (Oral)
CM-4856-CWP-2026 (amend (p))
This application under Order VI Rule 17 read with Section 151 CPC has been filed on behalf of the applicant-petitioner seeking permission to place on record the amended writ petition.
For the reasons mentioned in the application, the same is allowed. The amended writ petition along with appended documents are taken on record, subject to all just exceptions.
Main Case (O&M)
Learned counsel for the parties are ad idem that the controversy raised in the present petition stands answered by the Bombay High Court in Hikal Ltd. v. Union of India, (2025) 34 Centax 249 (Bom.), against which the Special Leave Petition (SLP) filed before the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India, being SLP (C) No.24550 of 2025 along with connected matters, has also been dismissed.
The observations made by the Bombay High Court in paragraphs 114 and 115 of the judgment rendered in Hikal Ltd. (supra) read as under:-
“114.Upon comprehensive review of all the above aspects, we hold that, following the omission or repeal of the impugned Rules, i.e., Rules 89(4B) and 96(10) of the CGST Rules via Notification dated 08 October 2024, and in the absence of any saving clauses or the benefit of Section 6 of the General Clauses Act, all pending proceedings such as undisposed show cause notices, orders disposing of show cause notices issued after 08 October 2024, or even orders made before 08 October 2024 but not yet finalised due to appeals before the Appellate Authorities or challenges before this Court, thus not constituting “transactions past and closed” are not preserved and will stand lapsed.
115.Accordingly, we quash and set aside the impugned show cause notices and the impugned orders in original. Furthermore, we also quash and set aside the orders refusing some of the Petitioners’ applications for refund, restore those applications to the files of the relevant Authorities, and direct the Authorities to consider and dispose of such refund applications in light of the declaration made by us above regarding the omission and repeal of the impugned Rules. This process must be completed within four months of the date of this order’s upload, after providing the Petitioners with a fair opportunity to be heard.”
In the facts and circumstances of the case, we find no reason to take a different view from that adjudicated upon by the Bombay High Court.
Accordingly, the instant writ petition is disposed of in terms of the adjudication made by the Bombay High Court in Hikal Ltd. (supra).
All ending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of.