Daily Intelligence Capsule — 12 August 2026

Latest EditionLatest Edition — Wednesday, 12 August 2026

GST

Supreme Court: Omission of Rule 96(10) Applies to Pending IGST Refund Proceedings

GST

Supreme Court holds omission of Rule 96(10) of the CGST Rules applies to all IGST refund proceedings pending as on 8 October 2024, relying on the Kolhapur Canesugar principle that an omitted rule without a saving clause cannot sustain pending proceedings.

Read the briefing

GST

Bombay High Court: Natural Justice Cannot Be a "Sheet Anchor" to Bypass Statutory GST Appeal and Pre-Deposit

Bombay HC dismisses a writ against a ₹6.50 crore GST demand, holding natural justice cannot be routinely invoked to bypass the statutory appeal mechanism and mandatory pre-deposit; flags a "growing tendency" to attempt this.

Read more

GST Compliance

Practical Compliance Guide: GST SCN Limitation Deadlines for FY 2020-21 (Section 74) and FY 2022-23 (Section 73)

Worked calculation of the two approaching GST SCN limitation deadlines — 28 August 2026 (Sec 74, FY 2020-21) and 30 September 2026 (Sec 73, FY 2022-23) — plus the FY 2024-25 Section 74A shift.

Read more

Did You Know

Kolhapur Canesugar Works Ltd. precedent behind the Rule 96(10) ruling

The Supreme Court's Rule 96(10) omission ruling rests on the Constitution Bench principle in Kolhapur Canesugar Works Ltd. v. Union of India: an omitted rule without a saving clause is treated as if it never existed.

Quiz of the Day

Rule 96(10) omission (Goodluck India)

In M/s Goodluck India Limited & Anr. v. Union of India & Ors., what Constitution Bench precedent did the Supreme Court rely on to hold that pending Rule 96(10) proceedings could not continue? Answer: Kolhapur Canesugar Works Ltd. v. Union of India.