Disposed¶32

M/S. Parnami Logistics India Pvt. Ltd. v. Union of India

Rajasthan HC12 Mar 2026CW/9289/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Rajasthan High Court Jaipur DB; D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 9289/2024; [2026:RJ-JP:10505-DB]; petitioner M/s. Parnami Logistics India Pvt. Ltd.; respondents Union of India and State GST authorities; GST matter disposed of in terms of order dated 15.02.2024 in DBCWP No.1113/2024; pre-deposit/protection under Section 112(8) of the Rajasthan Goods and Services Tax, 2017; deposit directed within three months; Tribunal not constituted, appeal liberty issue; issue covered by DBCWP No.4740/2024 (Jagdamba Motors vs. Union of India & Ors.), decision dated 27.11.2024.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed to deposit the amount as per the provision of Section 112(8) of the Act within three months; petition disposed of in terms of the order dated 15.02.2024 in D.B. Civil Writ Petition No.1113/2024. ¶32

M/S. Parnami Logistics India Pvt. Ltd. Vs Union of… — GST and Indirect Tax | Rajasthan HC (2026)

¶1

[2026:RJ-JP:10505-DB]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶3

D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 9289/2024

¶4

M/s. Parnami Logistics India Pvt. Ltd., S-16A, Land Mark Building, Mahaveer Marg, C-Scheme, Jaipur Through Its Authorized Signatory Udai Parnami S/o. Sh. Ashok Parnami R/o 314, Adrash Nagar, Jaipur 302004

¶5

----Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

Union Of India, Through Secretary Finance Department, Government Of India, New Delhi

¶8

State Of Rajasthan, Through Chief Commissioner, State Goods And Service Tax, Rajasthan, Jaipur

¶9

Apellate Authority, Addl./ Joint Commissioner (Appeals), State Goods And Service Tax, Ambedkar Circle, Jaipur

¶10

Deputy Commissioner, State Goods And Service Tax, Circle-I, Jaipur Iii, Jaipur

¶11

----Respondents

¶12

For Petitioner(s)	:	Mr. Purushottam Lal Hissaria
For Respondent(s)	:	Mr. Sandeep Pathak & Mr. Arnav Singh
		Ms. Mahi Yadav, AAG
		Mr. Rohan Mittal
		Ms. Harshita verma
		Ms. Harshita Sharma
		Ms. Chelsi Agarwal

¶13

HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINIT KUMAR MATHUR

¶14

Order

¶15

12/03/2026

¶16

Learned counsel for the parties are at ad idem that the issue involved in the present petition is covered by decision of Division Bench of this Court dated 27.11.2024, passed in D.B. Civil Writ

¶17

[2026:RJ-JP:10505-DB]

¶18

[CW-9289/2024]

¶19

(2 of 3)

¶20

Petition No.4740/2024 titled as Jagdamba Motors vs. Union of India & Ors. and connected matters.

¶21

Learned counsel for petitioner at this stage submits that the appeal against the order of First Appellate Court cannot be filed as the Tribunal is not functional.

¶22

Learned counsel for respondents submits that in similar matters, directions have been issued by this Court in D.B. Civil Writ Petition No.1113/2024 to which the counsel for the respondent has not raised any objection.

¶23

The order dated 15.02.2024 passed in D.B. Civil Writ Petition No.1113/2024 is reproduced below:-

¶24

“1. Though the matter comes up for admission today, with the consent of the parties, the petition is being disposed of finally.

¶25

At the outset, learned counsel for the respondents has submitted that at present the Tribunal has not been constituted and the process towards constitution of the Tribunal is going on, therefore, in these circumstances, the petition may not be kept pending but with appropriate protection available under Section 112(8) of the Rajasthan Goods and Services Tax, 2017 (for short ‘the Act’), this petition may be disposed off with liberty to the petitioner to file appeal within stipulated period from the date the Tribunal is constituted. In support of his submission, he places reliance upon a circular dated 23.03.2020 issued by Government of Rajasthan Finance Department (Tax Division).

¶26

Learned counsel for the petitioner agrees to the disposal of the petition on the aforesaid condition.

¶27

Accordingly, this petition, at this stage, is disposed off with a direction that in case petitioner makes payment as per provisions contained in Subsection (8) of Section 112of the Act, further proceedings shall not be drawn for recovery of the balance amount, provided that the petitioner avails

¶28

(3 of 3)

¶29

[2026:RJ-JP:10505-DB]

¶30

[CW-9289/2024]

¶31

statutory remedy of appeal within a period of three months from the date of the constitution of the Tribunal.”

¶32

The petition is disposed of in terms of order dated 15.02.2024 passed in D.B. Civil Writ Petition No.1113/2024. Let petitioner deposit the amount as per the provision of Section 112(8) of the Act within three months from today.

¶33

(VINIT KUMAR MATHUR),J

¶34

(PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI),J

¶35

54-Shahenshah/Nitin/-

M/S. Parnami Logistics India Pvt. Ltd. v. Union of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S. Parnami Logistics India Pvt. Ltd. v. Union of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Deepti Chinaria Daughter of Shri Vinod Kumar Chinaria Vs Ajmer Vidyut Vitran Nigam Limited

Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation Vs Rajendra Chaturvedi S/O Shri Suraj Mal (Conductor)

Executive Engineer, Phed Division Vs Sachdeva Metal Works

M/S Bhawani Silicate Industries Vs Union of India

M/S. Bhawani Silicate Industries Vs Union of India

M/S Bharat Kirana Bhandar Vs State of Rajasthan