BharatTaxGST

M/S Parveen Industries PVT LTD vs. The Union Of INDIA And Others

Original PDF →
CWP/10774/2026HC Punjab and HaryanaGSTCNR PHHC01045695202608 September 2026Bench: JUSTICE (TO BE NOMINATED),MR. JUSTICE ROHIT KAPOOR2 pages

No AI summary yet for this judgment.

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
` 122 I M/s Parveen I Union of Indi CORAM: H H Present: M M ASHWANI K 1. L raised in the Hikal Ltd. v. Special Leave being SLP (C dismissed. 2. T 114 and 115 o “ t R 0 b p IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUN AT CHANDIG CWP-1 Date of Industries Pvt. Ltd. Vs. a and others HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTI HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ROH Mr. Vikrant Kackria, Advocate f Ms. Ridhi Bansal, Jr. Standing C *** KUMAR MISHRA, CHIEF JU Learned counsel for the parties present petition stands answer . Union of India, (2025) 34 Ce e Petition (SLP) filed before th C) No.24550 of 2025 along wit The observations made by the of the judgment rendered in Hika “114. Upon comprehensive revie that, following the omission or Rules 89(4B) and 96(10) of the 08 October 2024, and in the ab benefit of Section 6 of the G proceedings such as undispo NJAB AND HARYANA GARH 10774-2026 (O&M) f Decision: 08.09.2026 …Petitioner …Respondents ICE HIT KAPOOR for the petitioner. Counsel for CBIC. USTICE (Oral) s are ad idem that the controv red by the Bombay High Cour ntax 249 (Bom.), against which he Hon’ble Supreme Court of In th connected matters, has also b Bombay High Court in paragra al Ltd. (supra) read as under:- ew of all the above aspects, we h repeal of the impugned Rules, CGST Rules via Notification d bsence of any saving clauses or General Clauses Act, all pend sed show cause notices, or versy rt in h the ndia, been aphs hold i.e., dated r the ding ders RAJESH KUMAR 2026.09.14 09:43 I attest the accuracy and

authenticity of this order/judgment.

CWP-10774-2026 (O&M) [2]

disposing of show cause notices issued after 08 October 2024, or even orders made before 08 October 2024 but not yet finalised due to appeals before the Appellate Authorities or challenges before this Court, thus not constituting “transactions past and closed” are not preserved and will stand lapsed. 115. Accordingly, we quash and set aside the impugned show cause notices and the impugned orders in original. Furthermore, we also quash and set aside the orders refusing some of the Petitioners’ applications for refund, restore those applications to the files of the relevant Authorities, and direct the Authorities to consider and dispose of such refund applications in light of the declaration made by us above regarding the omission and repeal of the impugned Rules. This process must be completed within four months of the date of this order’s upload, after providing the Petitioners with a fair opportunity to be heard.”

3.

In the facts and circumstances of the case, we find no reason to take a different view from that as adjudicated upon by the Bombay High Court.

4.

Accordingly, the instant writ petition is disposed of in terms of the adjudication made by the Bombay High Court in Hikal Ltd. (supra).

5.

All pending misc. application(s), if any, also stand disposed of.

(ASHWANI KUMAR MISHRA)

CHIEF JUSTICE

(ROHIT KAPOOR)

JUDGE 08.09.2026 rajesh

1.

Whether speaking/reasoned?

: Yes/No

2.

Whether reportable?

: Yes/No RAJESH KUMAR 2026.09.14 09:43 I attest the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment.

Reproduced from the public record of the Punjab and Haryana High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.