Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Rajasthan · body

2026 DAILYLAW 16506 (RAJ)

M/S CORONATION EXPORTS v. SUPERINTENDENT, CENTRAL GOODS AND SERVICE TAX DEPARTMENT

CW/2406/2026 · 2026-02-13

Sangeeta Sharma, Sanjeev Prakash Sharma

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

[2026:RJ-JP:6930-DB] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 2406/2026 M/s Coronation Exports, Through Its Proprietor Shri Vishal Jain 341A, Mahaveer Nagar, Tonk Road, Jaipur-302018 (Raj). ----Petitioner Versus 1. Superintendent, Central Goods And Service Tax Department, Range-XXX, Division-F, Jaipur. 2. Union of India, Through Secretary Finance, Ministry of Finance, North Block, New Delhi-110001. -----Respondents 3. State of Rajasthan, Through Secretary Finance, Government of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Janpath, Jaipur-05. ----Proforma Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Sarvesh Jain For Respondent(s) : Mr. Ajay Shukla, Sr. Standing Counsel. Ms. Mahi Yadav, AAG with Mr. Rohan Mittal. HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE MR. SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SANGEETA SHARMA Order 13/02/2026 1. Issue notice. 2. Mr. Ajay Shukla, learned counsel accepts notice on behalf of the respondent Nos.1 & 2. 3. Ms. Mahi Yadav, learned Additional Advocate General accepts notice on behalf of respondent No.3. 4. Both the learned counsel are ad idem that present case may be decided at this stage considering the short controversy raised in the present petition. [2026:RJ-JP:6930-DB] (2 of 2) [CW-2406/2026] 5. We noticed that the rectification application was filed by the petitioner before the Appellate Authority on 24.06.2024 seeking rectification of the appellate order, however, more than six months have elapsed, but the rectification application has not been decided. 6. The provisions of Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 are mandatory in nature, however, certain time limitations laid down therein have been held not to be treated as mandatory and are directory. Even if there are directory provisions, then too, it is expected from the concerned Authority to try to adhere to the time limitations laid down. 7. Be that as it may, we find that lot of time has elapsed since the application was moved. We, therefore, direct the Appellate Authority to positively pass an order within a period of one month from today on the rectification application after giving due opportunity of hearing to both the parties. 8. The present Civil Writ Petition is disposed of accordingly. 9. All pending applications also stand disposed of. (SANGEETA SHARMA),J (SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA),ACTING CJ AMIT/KAVISH/21