Repealing law & saving clause

 The saving clause with substituted enactment in place to repealing act has  very important place regarding enforceability of prior enactment in past &future : if there is no saving clause with substituted enactment that meaning thereby that prior law is no more and it has been removed from statute book as it was never existed and if any proceedings are going on it would be end ,and fresh proceedings may be initiated In the contrary if there is saving clause then it shows that proceedings accrued in repealing act now  would be govern by new act : In the case of Kotak Mahindra Bank v/s  District Masistrate , Gujrat high court held which was reported in 2010 SCC on line Gujrat 10656 that  the order passed by excise authority on the date regarding confiscating immovable property was void due to amended enactment on the date of enforcing new enactment when substituted enactment enforced , the order by authority was having nullity, The earlier legislation was of Rule  173Q ( 2 )in which immobile property  can be conspicated :but new rule 28 

directs that ‘goods   ‘can only be confiscated  only Further :Section 6 (a) of General Clauses Act was a guiding factor that directs the impact of deleted clause and substituted clause :