Zoomcar INDIA Private Limited vs. Union Of INDIA

/529/2025HC RajasthanGSTCNR RJHC02109611202521 January 2026Bench: SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA,SANJEET PUROHIT2 pages

AI SummaryDismissed

Facts

The petitioner, Zoomcar India Private Limited, filed an application seeking a different order than the one passed on August 21, 2025, and requested permission to file an appeal. The High Court had previously disposed of the writ petition by holding that directions issued by the Supreme Court would govern the petitioner's case. The respondents included the Union of India, Goods and Services Tax Council, State of Rajasthan, and the Deputy Commissioner, Circle I Jaipur III, State Goods and Service Tax Department. The application was filed in D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 16861/2024, with the current proceeding being D.B. Civil Miscellaneous Application No. 529/2025.

Held

The Court held that the application for a different order and permission to file an appeal was misconceived. The reasoning was that the writ petition had already been disposed of by an order stating that the directions issued by the Supreme Court would govern the petitioner's case. Therefore, no case for review or recall of that order was made out. The principle established is that once a matter is disposed of based on higher court directions, a subsequent application seeking review or permission to appeal, without demonstrating a valid ground for review or a change in circumstances, is unlikely to succeed. The application was dismissed.

Key Issues

1. Whether the application for a different order and permission to file an appeal is maintainable, given the previous disposal of the writ petition based on Supreme Court directions. Petitioner's Argument: The petitioner sought to have the previous order modified or to be allowed to file an appeal, implying a belief that the existing order was not appropriate or that further recourse was necessary. Revenue's Argument: The respondents, represented by the State and Central government counsel, implicitly argued against the application by not consenting to it and by the Court's eventual dismissal. The Court's reasoning suggests the respondents' position was that the matter was concluded by the previous order.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances

[2026:RJ-JP:2813-DB] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR D.B. Civil Miscellaneous Application No. 529/2025 In D.B. Civil Writ Petition No.16861/2024 Zoomcar India Private Limited, A Company Incorporated Under The Companies Act, 2013, Having Its Office 1St Floor, 14 Laxmi Complex, Subhash Marg, Jaipur, Rajasthan - 302001 Through Its Authorized Signatory Shri Suresh Kumar Katariya S/o Mool Chand, Working As Associate Lead Operations Resident Of I-19, Yogi Marg, Mazdoor Nagar, Ajmer Road, Jaipur-302006. ----Petitioner Versus 1. Union Of India, Through The Secretary, Department Of Revenue, Ministry Of Finance, Central Secretariat, North Block New Delhi 110 001. 2. Goods And Services Tax Council, Through Its Chairperson, 5Th Floor, Tower Ii, Jeevan Bharti Building, Janpath Road, Connaught Place, New Delhi 110 001. 3. State Of Rajasthan, Through Commissioner, Commercial Taxes, Government Of Rajasthan, Jaipur. 4. Deputy Commissioner, Circle I Jaipur Iii, State Goods And Service Tax Department Having Its Office At Room No. 429, Zonal Kar Bhavan, Jhalana, Jaipur. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. H.V. Nandwana with Mr. Y.V. Nandwana For Respondent(s) : Ms. Mahi Yadav, AAG assisted by Ms. Harshita Verma & Mr. Rohan Mittal Mr. Kinshuk Jain, Sr. Standing Counsel HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE MR. SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEET PUROHIT (THROUGH VC)

Order 21/01/2026

Heard.

[2026:RJ-JP:2813-DB] (2 of 2) [WMAP-529/2025]

Learned counsel for the petitioner-applicant submits that a different order be passed instead of order dated 21.08.2025 and the petitioner may be allowed to file appeal.

Since we disposed of the petition by passing an order holding that the directions issued by the Hon’ble Supreme Court shall govern the case of the petitioner, no case for review/recall is made out.

Accordingly, the application is misconceived and the same is dismissed. (SANJEET PUROHIT),J (SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA),ACTING CJ N.GANDHI/RAJAT/9

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.