21082-Db) on 19 May, 2026

Rajasthan High Court – Jaipur

Urn: Cw / 37916U / 2024M/S Mukundgarh … vs Union Of India (2026:Rj-Jp:21082-Db) on 19 May, 2026

[2026:RJ-JP:21082-DB]

        HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
                    BENCH AT JAIPUR

                 D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 18162/2024

M/s     Mukundgarh          Indane,        Near      Bsnl      Office,      Mukungarh,
Nawalgarh,       Jhunjhunu,           Rajasthan,          333707,        Through     Its
Proprietor Mr. Kailash Chandra Khariya, S/o Mr. Sukhveer Singh,
Aged About 54 Years, Ward No.16, Near Kanoria Hospital,
Mukundgarh, (Rural), Jhunjhunu, Rajasthan-333705.
                                                                         ----Petitioner
                                        Versus
1.       Union Of India, Through The Secretary, Ministry Of
         Finance, Department Of Revenue, New Delhi.
2.       Central        Board      Of     Indirect        Taxes       And     Customs,
         Department Of Revenue, Ministry Of Finance, Government
         Of India, Having Office At North Block, New Delhi Through
         Its Chairman.
3.       The Chief Commissioner, Cgst, Jaipur Zone, Ncrb, Statue
         Circle, C-Scheme, Jaipur-302005.
4.       State     Of    Rajasthan,         Through         The      Additional    Chief
         Secretary (Finance), Government Of Rajasthan, 1St Floor,
         Main Building, Government Secretariat, Janpath, Jaipur-
         302005.
5.       State Of Rajasthan, Through The Joint Commissioner,
         State Tax, Circle-Jhunjhunu, Kar Bhawan, Mandawa Mod,
         Jhunjhunu, Bikaner, Rajasthan.
6.       The Appellate Authority, State Tax, Kar Bhawan, Tulsi
         Circle, Bikaner, Rajasthan.
                                                                     ----Respondents

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Akshay Bishnoi on behalf of
Mr. Ravi Gupta
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Rohan Mittal, AAAG with
Mr. Kuldeep Singh Rathore, AAAG &
Ms. Chelsi Aggarwal
Mr. Raj Kumar Yadav

HON’BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE MR. SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH KUMAR

SPONSORED

Order

(Uploaded on 21/05/2026 at 01:32:57 PM)
(Downloaded on 22/05/2026 at 12:34:16 AM)
[2026:RJ-JP:21082-DB] (2 of 3) [CW-18162/2024]

19/05/2026

1. Heard.

2. The challenge in this present writ petition is to the order

passed under Section 73 of the CGST Act, (for short ‘the Act of

2017’) as well as the order passed by in appeal under Section 107

of the RGST/CGST Act.

3. Since the Tribunal has started functioning, further appeal

may be filed before the Tribunal in terms of Section 112 of the Act

of 2017. So far as the question regarding the validity of

notification issued under Section 168A of the CGST Act and the

provisions of Section 168 of the CGST Act itself are concerned,

they are subject matter of scrutiny before the Hon’ble Supreme

Court in Special Leave to Appeal (C) No.4240/2025.

4. We have already disposed of several writ petitions; one of

which is D.B. Civil Writ Petition No.16649/2025-Eagle Trans

Shipping and Logistics India Private Limited Vs. Union of

India & Ors., decided on 22.08.2025, where aforesaid similar

challenge was made and it was observed as under:

“1. On facts it is noticed that the petitioners have already
filed a reply to the show cause notice issued under Section
73 of the CGST Act, 2017 and adjudication has already been
done on the said aspects.

2. Keeping in view that the statutory remedy of appeal is
available under Section 107 of the DGST Act, SGST Act as
well as CGST Act, we would not interfere with the impugned
orders, so far as the merits of the case are concerned.
However, the question of validity of the notification issued
under Section 168A of CGST Act, 2017 and provisions of
Section 168 itself are a subject-matter of scrutiny before the
Hon’ble Supreme Court in Special Leave to Appeal (C)
No.4240/2025.

3. We therefore, leave it open to the petitioners to either
make submissions if they so choose before the Apex Court or
to wait for the final adjudication by the Apex Court. Of
course, the validity of the impugned order with respect to
the aspects of Section 168A of CGST Act, 2017 would be
governed by the order passed by the Hon’ble Supreme
Court. Our views are buttressed by the view, which has

(Uploaded on 21/05/2026 at 01:32:57 PM)
(Downloaded on 22/05/2026 at 12:34:16 AM)
[2026:RJ-JP:21082-DB] (3 of 3) [CW-18162/2024]

taken by the High Court of Delhi in its decision dated

05.05.2025 in W.P. (C) No.6290/2024 and CM Application
No.26217/2024, we accordingly, leave it open to the
petitioners to challenge the order on merit in appeal. If an
appeal is preferred within a period of one month henceforth,
the same shall be examined purely on merits without delving
on the questions of limitation.

4. In view of the above, all the petitions are disposed of
accordingly.

5. Pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of.”

5. Accordingly, the present writ petition stands disposed of

mutatis mutandis.

(ASHUTOSH KUMAR),J (SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA),ACTING CJ

N.GANDHI/RAJAT/117

(Uploaded on 21/05/2026 at 01:32:57 PM)
(Downloaded on 22/05/2026 at 12:34:16 AM)

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)