IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 12321 of 2023 With R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 13933 of 2023 With R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 18061 of 2023 With R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 21176 of 2023 With R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 373 of 2024 With R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 1473 of 2024 With R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 8311 of 2025 FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:

HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.S. SUPEHIA and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRANAV TRIVEDI ==========================================================

Approved for Reporting Yes No ✔

==========================================================

MESSRS FILATEX INDIA LTD. & ANR.

Versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS.

==========================================================

Appearance:

AMAL PARESH DAVE(8961) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1,2 MR PARESH M DAVE(260) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1,2 MR UTKARSH R SHARMA(6157) for the Respondent(s) No. 1,2,3 ==========================================================

CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.S. SUPEHIA and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRANAV TRIVEDI Date : 28/11/2025 COMMON ORAL JUDGMENT (PER : HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.S. SUPEHIA)

1. RULE returnable forthwith. Learned Senior Standing Counsel Mr. Utkarsh Sharma waives service of notice of Rule on behalf of the respondents.

2. At the outset, learned advocates for the respective parties have submitted that the present writ petitions may be disposed of in terms of the Judgment and Order dated 20.11.2025 passed in group of matters being Special Civil Application No. 3081 of 2025 and allied matters.

3. In the similar set of facts as well as issue, the Court vide Judgment and Order dated 20.11.2025 has held thus:

“5. It is not in dispute that the Coordinate Bench of this Court, in a group of matters being Special Civil Application No.22519 of 2019, vide judgment dated 13^th June, 2025, has dealt with the issue with regard to Notification No.20/2024 dated 8th October, 2025, repealing Rule 96(10) of the Rules without any saving clause, and has held as under :

“203. In view of above conspectus of law, it appears that the recommendations of the GST Council to omit Rule 96(10) prospectively would apply to all the pending proceedings and cases. However, the contention on behalf of the Revenue that the petitioners have filed these petitions challenging the validity of Rule 96(10) cannot be said to be pending proceedings is without any basis because the petitioners have also challenged the show cause notices as well as orders-in-original passed by the respondents by invoking Rule 96(10) for rejecting the refund claims of the petitioners and therefore, it can be said that these petitions are nothing but pending proceedings before the Court which has not achieved finality when the Notification No.20/2024 came into force with effect from 8th October, 2024.

204. By Notification No.20/2024 Rules, 2024 have been notified and as per Rule 10 of the said Rules, Rule 96(10) of the CGST Rules has been omitted with prospective effect. This would give rise to three situations, firstly, whether the same would be applicable retrospectively, or secondly, prospectively or thirdly, same would be applicable prospectively but also to “pending proceedings”. As discussed here-in-above, Rule 10 of Rules, 2024 is applicable prospectively and the same also would be applicable to pending proceedings.

205. Therefore, we are of the opinion that Notification No.20/2024 dated 8th October, 2024 would be applicable to all the pending proceedings/cases meaning thereby that Rule

96(10) would stand omitted prospectively but applicable to pending proceedings/cases where final adjudication has not taken place.

206. Therefore, in view of foregoing reasons, the omission of Rule 96(10) would apply to all the proceedings/cases/petitions which are pending for adjudication either before this Court or before the respondent adjudicating authority and no further proceedings are required to be carried forward and petitioners would be en