{"id":400044,"date":"2026-10-30T09:00:09","date_gmt":"2026-10-30T03:30:09","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=400044"},"modified":"2026-10-29T18:02:56","modified_gmt":"2026-10-29T12:32:56","slug":"goodluck-india-supreme-court-rule-96-10-cgst-rules-pending-proceedings","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/10\/30\/goodluck-india-supreme-court-rule-96-10-cgst-rules-pending-proceedings\/","title":{"rendered":"Quietus to Rule 96(10): SC Confirms the Omission Applies to All Pending Proceedings"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n

This article analyses the Supreme Court’s decision in Goodluck India Ltd. v. Union of India, examining the effect of omitting Rule 96(10)<\/a> of the CGST Rules, 2017<\/a>, on pending proceedings involving export refunds, recovery demands and tax disputes.<\/p>\n

When Rule 96(10)<\/a>, Central Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017 (CGST Rules, 2017<\/a><\/span>) was finally omitted in October 2024, exporters exhaled — but only briefly. The department took the position that the omission was prospective, leaving thousands of legacy demands, refund rejections and recovery notices alive for the pre-omission period. On 6 August 2026, in Goodluck India Ltd.<\/span> v. Union of India<\/span><\/a>1<\/sup><\/a>, the Supreme Court brought that debate to a close: The omission of Rule 96(10)<\/a> applies to all pending proceedings, and legacy disputes built on the erstwhile rule must fall.<\/p>\n

The rule that caused all the trouble<\/p>\n

1. Section 16<\/a>, Integrated Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017<\/a> (IGST Act) gives an exporter two routes to relief:<\/p>\n

(a<\/span>) export under letter of undertaking (LUT)\/bond and claim refund of unutilised input tax credit (ITC) (the Rule 89 route); or<\/p>\n

(b<\/span>) export on payment of integrated goods and services tax (IGST) and claim refund of the tax paid (the Rule 96<\/a> route).<\/p>\n

2. The second route is faster and, for many, more valuable. Rule 96(10)<\/a> was an attempt to close that route to a large class of exporters — broadly, those who had procured inputs under concessional or exemption-based schemes, such as:<\/p>\n

(a<\/span>) export oriented units (EOUs) importing without payment of basic customs duty (BCD) and IGST (Notification No. 78\/2017-Cus);<\/p>\n

(b<\/span>) advance authorisation holders importing without BCD and IGST (Notification No. 79\/2017-Cus);<\/p>\n

(c<\/span>) deemed export procurements (Notification No. 48\/2017-CT); and<\/p>\n

(d<\/span>) merchant exporters buying at the concessional 0.1 per cent rate (Notification Nos. 40\/2017-CT(R) and 41\/2017-IGST(R)).<\/p>\n

3. In practice, the sub-rule generated exactly the kind of litigation it was designed to prevent — mismatches, recovery demands with interest, and a running dispute over whether foregoing only BCD (while paying IGST) took an exporter outside the bar. The controversy is one that has dogged exporters for years.<\/p>\n

The “omission” — and the “prospective” flashpoint<\/p>\n

4. Acting on the recommendation of the 54th GST Council meeting, the Government omitted Rule 96(10)<\/a> through Notification No. 20\/2024-CT with effect from 8 October 2024. While making that recommendation, it was recorded that the rule was leading to unnecessary complications without any intended benefit, and omission was recommended “with prospective effect”.<\/p>\n

5. That single phrase — prospective — became the battleground. The department argued that pre-8 October 2024 demands survived; assessees argued that an omission without a saving clause wipes the provision off the statute book for all pending matters.<\/p>\n

The High Court decisions<\/p>\n

6. Initially, the Gujarat High Court upheld Rule 96(10)<\/a> in Cosmo Films Ltd.<\/span> v. Union of India<\/span><\/a>2<\/sup><\/a>. Soon after, the Kerala High Court, in Sance Laboratories (P) Ltd.<\/span> v. Union of India<\/span>3<\/sup><\/a>, struck the rule down as ultra vires Section 16, IGST Act and manifestly arbitrary, and quashed the demands founded on it; the Calcutta High Court, in Techno Waxchem (P) Ltd.<\/span> v. Union of India<\/span><\/a>4<\/sup><\/a>, took the same view for the pre-omission period. The Uttarakhand High Court in Sri Sai Vishwas Polymers<\/span> v. Union of India<\/span><\/a>5<\/sup><\/a> set aside the demands following the Kerala High Court declaration and the omission.<\/span><\/p>\n

7. After the omission with effect from 8 October 2024, a line of High Courts held that the omission operates on all pending proceedings and set aside the Department’s demands — the Gujarat High Court in Addwrap Packaging (P) Ltd.<\/span> v. Union of India<\/span><\/a>6<\/sup><\/a>, the Bombay High Court in Hikal Ltd.<\/span> v. Union of India<\/span><\/a>7<\/sup><\/a>, and the Andhra Pradesh High Court in BVL Granites<\/span> v. Commr. of Central Taxes<\/span><\/a>8<\/sup><\/a>.<\/span><\/p>\n

8. These decisions, and the conflicting positions taken across the High Courts, were carried to the Supreme Court.<\/p>\n

What the Supreme Court held<\/p>\n

The Supreme Court in Goodluck India Ltd.<\/span> v. Union of India<\/span> held:<\/p>\n

1. Omission without a saving clause obliterates the rule<\/span>: Following the Constitution Bench in Kolhapur Canesugar Works Ltd.<\/span> v. Union of India<\/span><\/span><\/a><\/span>9<\/sup><\/a>, the Court reiterated the settled common law principle that deleting a provision erases it from the statute book as completely as if it had never existed. Section 6, General Clauses Act — which preserves pending action on repeal — applies to a Central Act or regulation, not to the omission of a rule (para 36 of the Kolhapur Canesugar<\/span><\/a><\/span><\/span> case<\/span>). Absent a saving clause or a deeming fiction, proceedings under an omitted rule cannot continue.<\/span><\/p>\n

2. No saving clause, no sunset clause<\/span>: As the learned Additional Solicitor General (ASG) fairly conceded, the legislature enacted neither a saving clause nor a sunset clause when it omitted Rule 96(10)<\/a>. On the Kolhapur Canesugar<\/span><\/a><\/span> principle, that is decisive.<\/span><\/p>\n

3. A Council recommendation is advisory, not binding<\/span>: The recommendation that the omission be “prospective” is exactly that — advisory. It does not bind the rule-making authority, and the notification itself carried no such limitation. The court pointedly observed that if the rule was omitted to end unnecessary complications once and for all, the legislative intent could not have been to keep those very complications alive for pending matters.<\/p>\n

4. The vires challenge falls away<\/span>: Since the assessees had already secured the practical relief they sought, their special leave petitions (SLPs) were dismissed as infructuous. The vires of Rule 96(10)<\/a> therefore remains judicially untested at the apex level.<\/p>\n

What this means for exporters<\/p>\n

The practical fallout is substantial and immediate:<\/p>\n\n\n\n<\/colgroup>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
\n

Situation<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

Effect of the ruling<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

\n

Refund claims under Rule 96<\/a> rejected or withheld solely on Rule 96(10)<\/a>, still pending.<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

The bar no longer survives in pending proceedings; the refund falls to be considered without the Rule 96(10)<\/a> restriction.<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

\n

Show cause notices (SCNs)\/order-in-original (OIOs)\/demands with interest raised under Rule 96(10)<\/a> for the pre-omission period, under challenge or appeal.<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

The foundation of the demand is gone; such proceedings should be closed or set aside.<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

\n

Appeals pending before appellate authorities, the Tribunal or the High Courts.<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

Squarely covered; expect listing and disposal in line with this order.<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

\n

Matters already concluded — paid, uncontested or time-barred.<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

The relief is expressly for pending proceedings; Closed matters are unlikely to reopen unless time-limit to file refund or challenge the demands are still available.<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

Concluding remarks<\/p>\n

With this decision, the Supreme Court has effectively brought quietus to the protracted litigation surrounding Rule 96(10)<\/a>. The net effect is finality. The omission of Rule 96(10)<\/a>, unaccompanied by any saving or sunset clause, operates on all pending proceedings; and demands, refund rejections and recovery actions founded on the erstwhile rule can no longer be sustained. For exporters, a restriction that spawned years of avoidable disputes now stands buried; for the department, the direction is to bring the remaining proceedings to a close rather than prolong them. The chapter on Rule 96(10)<\/a> may, at last, be treated as shut.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n\n

*Bcom, FCA, LLB, Partner, H N A Law Chambers. Author can be reached at: venkataprasad@hnaindia.com<\/a>.<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

1.<\/a> (2026) 162 GSTR 383<\/a> : 2026 SCC OnLine SC 1523.<\/p>\n

2.<\/a> (2021) 85 GSTR 79<\/a> : 2020 SCC OnLine Guj 3523.<\/p>\n

3.<\/a> (2025) 137 GSTR 627 : 2024 SCC OnLine Ker 7623<\/a>.<\/p>\n

4.<\/a> 2026 SCC OnLine Cal 7157<\/a>.<\/p>\n

5.<\/a> (2026) 158 GSTR 110 : 2025 SCC OnLine Utt 4636<\/a>.<\/p>\n

6.<\/a> (2026) 155 GSTR 231 : 2025 SCC OnLine Guj 3151<\/a>.<\/p>\n

7.<\/a> (2026) 158 GSTR 182 : 2025 SCC OnLine Bom 3169<\/a>.<\/p>\n

8.<\/a> 2026 SCC OnLine AP 1660<\/a>.<\/p>\n

9.<\/a> (2000) 2 SCC 536<\/a>.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

by P. Venkata Prasad*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":67011,"featured_media":400054,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[42503,1191],"tags":[53827,118331,118330,42479,118322,118325,118335,118329,118326,118328,118334,118333,118323,118324,118327,118332],"class_list":["post-400044","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-legal-analysis","category-op-ed","tag-cgst-rules-2017","tag-export-on-payment-of-igst","tag-export-under-lut","tag-general-clauses-act","tag-goodluck-india-ltd-v-union-of-india","tag-gst-export-refunds","tag-gst-litigation-india","tag-gst-refund-rejection","tag-igst-act-2017","tag-input-tax-credit-refunds","tag-kolhapur-canesugar-works","tag-pending-gst-proceedings","tag-rule-9610-cgst-rules","tag-rule-9610-omission","tag-section-16-igst-act","tag-supreme-court-gst-judgment-2026"],"yoast_head":"\nGoodluck India: SC Clarifies Omission of Rule 96(10) CGST Rules | SCC Times<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"The Supreme Court clarifies that omitting Rule 96(10) of the CGST Rules applies to pending proceedings involving export refunds and GST demands.\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=400044\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Quietus to Rule 96(10): SC Confirms the Omission Applies to All Pending Proceedings\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"The Supreme Court clarifies that omitting Rule 96(10) of the CGST Rules applies to pending proceedings involving export refunds and GST demands.\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=400044\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"SCC Times\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2026-10-30T03:30:09+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/10\/Rule-9610-CGST-Rules.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"886\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"590\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Editor\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:title\" content=\"Quietus to Rule 96(10): SC Confirms the Omission Applies to All Pending Proceedings\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Editor\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"6 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/?p=400044#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/?p=400044\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Editor\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe\"},\"headline\":\"Quietus to Rule 96(10): SC Confirms the Omission Applies to All Pending Proceedings\",\"datePublished\":\"2026-10-30T03:30:09+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/?p=400044\"},\"wordCount\":1144,\"commentCount\":0,\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/?p=400044#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/10\\\/Rule-9610-CGST-Rules.webp\",\"keywords\":[\"CGST Rules 2017\",\"export on payment of IGST\",\"export under LUT\",\"General Clauses Act\",\"Goodluck India Ltd v Union of India\",\"GST export refunds\",\"GST litigation India\",\"GST refund rejection\",\"IGST Act 2017\",\"input tax credit refunds\",\"Kolhapur Canesugar Works\",\"pending GST proceedings\",\"Rule 96(10) CGST Rules\",\"Rule 96(10) omission\",\"Section 16 IGST Act\",\"Supreme Court GST judgment 2026\"],\"articleSection\":[\"Op Eds\",\"OP. ED.\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/?p=400044#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/?p=400044\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/?p=400044\",\"name\":\"Goodluck India: SC Clarifies Omission of Rule 96(10) CGST Rules | SCC Times\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/?p=400044#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/?p=400044#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/10\\\/Rule-9610-CGST-Rules.webp\",\"datePublished\":\"2026-10-30T03:30:09+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe\"},\"description\":\"The Supreme Court clarifies that omitting Rule 96(10) of the CGST Rules applies to pending proceedings involving export refunds and GST demands.\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/?p=400044#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/?p=400044\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/?p=400044#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/10\\\/Rule-9610-CGST-Rules.webp\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/10\\\/Rule-9610-CGST-Rules.webp\",\"width\":886,\"height\":590,\"caption\":\"Rule 96(10) CGST Rules\"},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/?p=400044#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Quietus to Rule 96(10): SC Confirms the Omission Applies to All Pending Proceedings\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/\",\"name\":\"SCC Times\",\"description\":\"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe\",\"name\":\"Editor\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Editor\"},\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/author\\\/editor_4\\\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Goodluck India: SC Clarifies Omission of Rule 96(10) CGST Rules | SCC Times","description":"The Supreme Court clarifies that omitting Rule 96(10) of the CGST Rules applies to pending proceedings involving export refunds and GST demands.","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=400044","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Quietus to Rule 96(10): SC Confirms the Omission Applies to All Pending Proceedings","og_description":"The Supreme Court clarifies that omitting Rule 96(10) of the CGST Rules applies to pending proceedings involving export refunds and GST demands.","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=400044","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2026-10-30T03:30:09+00:00","og_image":[{"width":886,"height":590,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/10\/Rule-9610-CGST-Rules.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Editor","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_title":"Quietus to Rule 96(10): SC Confirms the Omission Applies to All Pending Proceedings","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Editor","Est. reading time":"6 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=400044#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=400044"},"author":{"name":"Editor","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe"},"headline":"Quietus to Rule 96(10): SC Confirms the Omission Applies to All Pending Proceedings","datePublished":"2026-10-30T03:30:09+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=400044"},"wordCount":1144,"commentCount":0,"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=400044#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/10\/Rule-9610-CGST-Rules.webp","keywords":["CGST Rules 2017","export on payment of IGST","export under LUT","General Clauses Act","Goodluck India Ltd v Union of India","GST export refunds","GST litigation India","GST refund rejection","IGST Act 2017","input tax credit refunds","Kolhapur Canesugar Works","pending GST proceedings","Rule 96(10) CGST Rules","Rule 96(10) omission","Section 16 IGST Act","Supreme Court GST judgment 2026"],"articleSection":["Op Eds","OP. ED."],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=400044#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=400044","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=400044","name":"Goodluck India: SC Clarifies Omission of Rule 96(10) CGST Rules | SCC Times","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=400044#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=400044#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/10\/Rule-9610-CGST-Rules.webp","datePublished":"2026-10-30T03:30:09+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe"},"description":"The Supreme Court clarifies that omitting Rule 96(10) of the CGST Rules applies to pending proceedings involving export refunds and GST demands.","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=400044#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=400044"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=400044#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/10\/Rule-9610-CGST-Rules.webp","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/10\/Rule-9610-CGST-Rules.webp","width":886,"height":590,"caption":"Rule 96(10) CGST Rules"},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=400044#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Quietus to Rule 96(10): SC Confirms the Omission Applies to All Pending Proceedings"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/","name":"SCC Times","description":"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe","name":"Editor","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Editor"},"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_4\/"}]}},"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/10\/Rule-9610-CGST-Rules.webp","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/400044","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/67011"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=400044"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/400044\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":400056,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/400044\/revisions\/400056"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/400054"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=400044"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=400044"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=400044"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}