M/S Coronation Exports vs. Superintendent, Central Goods And Service Tax Department

Original PDF →
CW/2406/2026HC RajasthanGSTCNR RJHC02008607202613 February 2026Bench: SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA,SANGEETA SHARMA2 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

Facts

M/s Coronation Exports, the petitioner, filed a rectification application before the Appellate Authority on June 24, 2024, seeking correction of an appellate order. The respondents are the Superintendent, Central Goods and Services Tax Department, the Union of India, and the State of Rajasthan. More than six months have passed since the application was filed, and it remains undecided. The petitioner has approached the High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan, Bench at Jaipur, through a Civil Writ Petition seeking a directive for the decision of their rectification application.

Held

The Court noted that the rectification application was filed by the petitioner on June 24, 2024, and more than six months had elapsed without a decision. While acknowledging that certain time limitations in the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, are considered directory, the Court emphasized that authorities are expected to adhere to these timelines. Observing that a significant amount of time had passed, the Court directed the Appellate Authority to pass an order on the rectification application within one month from the date of the order, after providing due opportunity of hearing to both parties. The Court did not delve into the merits of the rectification application itself, focusing solely on the delay in its disposal.

Key Issues

1. Whether the Appellate Authority has failed to decide the rectification application filed by the petitioner within a reasonable time, and if so, what is the appropriate relief? The petitioner argued that the rectification application was filed on June 24, 2024, and despite the lapse of over six months, it has not been decided. They contended that while some time limitations in the CGST Act, 2017, may be directory, authorities are expected to adhere to them. The petitioner sought a direction for the expeditious disposal of their application. The respondents, through their counsel, accepted notice and agreed that the case could be decided at this stage, acknowledging the short controversy. No specific arguments were recorded for the respondents regarding the delay or the merits of the rectification application.

Sections Cited

Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
[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

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