Omission without Savings Clause

The Bombay HC decision in the case of Hikal Limited, revolves around the application of Rule 96(10), a point that limits refund eligibility in cases involving imports under advance authorization. Of particular interest is the ongoing debate surrounding the validity of proceedings post the rule's omission in October 2024. This legal battle not only impacts exporters directly but also sheds light on the broader implications concerning statutory rights versus conditional restrictions within the GST framework. The outcome of this litigation holds significance beyond Hikal Limited, resonating with all stakeholders involved in the intricate landscape of GST regulations. An analysis by J the App by JustIDT