TECHNO WAXCHEM PRIVATE LIMITED SWARNWARSHI PODDAR vs UNION OF INDIA AND ORS — WPA/13772/2025

Case under West Bengal Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 Section NA. Disposed: Contested--DISPOSED on 22nd May 2026.

Case disposed Next hearing 09-Jul-2025

CNR: WBCHCA0274782025

Filing Number

WPA/13422/2025

Filing Date

18-Jun-2025

Registration No

WPA/13772/2025

Registration Date

20-Jun-2025

Judge

Hon'ble Justice Raja Basu Chowdhury

Coram

Hon'ble Justice Raja Basu Chowdhury

Bench Type

Single Bench

Category

GROUP A (WRIT MATTERS) ( 1 )

Sub-Category

Miscellaneous ( 7 )

Judicial Branch

MANDAMUS SECTION

Decision Date

22-May-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--DISPOSED

Last updated 29-May-2026

Acts & Sections

West Bengal Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 Section NA

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.TECHNO WAXCHEM PRIVATE LIMITED SWARNWARSHI PODDAR

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.UNION OF INDIA AND ORS

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 22-May-2026

    Hon'ble Justice Raja Basu ChowdhuryView PDF

    Summary of WPA 13772/2025 The Calcutta High Court quashed a GST demand order of ₹6,28,27,407 against Techno Waxchem Private Limited, holding that proceedings based on Rule 96(10) of CGST Rules cannot survive after its omission by Notification dated 8th October 2024. The court found that when a rule is omitted without saving clauses, pending proceedings founded on that rule automatically terminate, citing Supreme Court precedent that Section 6 of General Clauses Act applies only to repeals of Central Acts/Regulations, not omissions of rules. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 13-Feb-2026

    Hon'ble Justice Raja Basu ChowdhuryView PDF

  4. 13-Feb-2026

    Part Heard Matters

    Hon'ble Justice Raja Basu Chowdhury

  5. 06-Feb-2026

    Hon'ble Justice Raja Basu ChowdhuryView PDF

  6. 29-Jan-2026

    Part Heard Matters

    Hon'ble Justice Raja Basu Chowdhury

  7. 16-Jan-2026

    Hon'ble Justice Raja Basu ChowdhuryView PDF

  8. 16-Jan-2026

    Part Heard Matters

    Hon'ble Justice Raja Basu Chowdhury

  9. 09-Jan-2026

    Hon'ble Justice Raja Basu ChowdhuryView PDF

  10. 05-Jan-2026

    Part Heard Matters

    Hon'ble Justice Raja Basu Chowdhury

  11. 01-Dec-2025

    Part Heard Matters

    Hon'ble Justice Raja Basu Chowdhury

  12. 03-Nov-2025

    Part Heard Matters

    Hon'ble Justice Raja Basu Chowdhury

  13. 19-Sep-2025

    Hon'ble Justice Raja Basu ChowdhuryView PDF

  14. 25-Aug-2025

    Upgraded Motion

    Hon'ble Justice Raja Basu Chowdhury

  15. 06-Aug-2025

    Hon'ble Justice Raja Basu ChowdhuryView PDF

  16. 30-Jul-2025

    Upgraded Motion

    Hon'ble Justice Raja Basu Chowdhury

  17. 24-Jul-2025

    New Motion - 9

    Hon'ble Justice Raja Basu Chowdhury

  18. 23-Jul-2025

    Hon'ble Justice Raja Basu ChowdhuryView PDF

  19. 23-Jul-2025

    Upgraded Motion

    Hon'ble Justice Raja Basu Chowdhury

  20. 22-Jul-2025

    Upgraded Motion

    Hon'ble Justice Raja Basu Chowdhury

  21. 17-Jul-2025

    To Be Mentioned

    Hon'ble Justice Raja Basu Chowdhury

  22. 11-Jul-2025

    Hon'ble Justice Raja Basu ChowdhuryView PDF

  23. 10-Jul-2025

    New Motion - 9

    Hon'ble Justice Raja Basu Chowdhury

  24. 09-Jul-2025

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  25. 18-Jun-2025

    Case filed

    Registration No. WPA/13772/2025

casestatus.in Summary

Summary of WPA 13772/2025 The Calcutta High Court quashed a GST demand order of ₹6,28,27,407 against Techno Waxchem Private Limited, holding that proceedings based on Rule 96(10) of CGST Rules cannot survive after its omission by Notification dated 8th October 2024. The court found that when a rule is omitted without saving clauses, pending proceedings founded on that rule automatically terminate, citing Supreme Court precedent that Section 6 of General Clauses Act applies only to repeals of Central Acts/Regulations, not omissions of rules. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case