Desk of CA. Praveen Sharma – 846 Series (CAPS) 

Bombay High Court in the case of Aarti Drugs Limited

The Bombay High Court heard the matter where the petitioner challenged the show-cause notice dated 02.08.2024 and the adjudication order dated 03.02.2025 issued under Rule 96(10) of the CGST Rules, 2017.

The petition sought quashing of both the notice and the order-in-original through writs of certiorari and mandamus under Article 226 of the Constitution.

The Court noted that both actions were based entirely on Rule 96(10) of the CGST Rules.

Reference was made to an earlier judgment holding that after the repeal of Rule 96(10) on 8 October 2024, all pending proceedings under that rule automatically lapse.

Applying that precedent, the Bench concluded that the petitioner’s case was identical and warranted the same relief.

The government counsel contended that the petitioner had not challenged the constitutional validity of Rule 96(10) nor availed alternate remedies.

The Court observed that when the legal issue has already been settled in Hikal Ltd., pursuing alternate remedies would be unnecessary.

Accordingly, the writ petition was allowed, and both the show-cause notice and the order-in-original were quashed, with no order as to costs.

LINK:CA. Praveen Sharma on Linkedin

Regards
CAPS