Supreme Court Issues Notice In Zoomcar Plea Over Denial Of Appeal Against GST Order By Rajasthan High Court

The Supreme Court on Wednesday issued notice on a special leave petition filed by Zoomcar India Pvt. Ltd., a self-drive car rental platform, challenging a Rajasthan High Court order that disposed of its writ petition without granting liberty to pursue a statutory appeal under the GST law.

A bench of Justice J.B. Pardiwala and Justice K.V. Viswanathan heard the matter and directed the issuance of notice.

Zoomcar had approached the High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan challenging notifications issued under Section 168A of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act. These notifications extended the time limit for passing orders under Section 73(10) for financial year 2019 to 2020 by invoking force majeure powers. The company had also challenged an adjudication order dated August 8, 2024 passed by the Deputy Commissioner under Section 73 confirming tax demand along with interest and penalty.

On August 21, 2025, the Rajasthan High Court disposed of the writ petition observing that the validity of the impugned notifications was already under consideration before the Supreme Court in a separate matter and held that the directions issued by the top court in those proceedings would govern Zoomcar's case.

However, the grievance raised in the special leave petition is limited. Appearing for the petitioner, Senior Advocate Prakash Shah submitted that while the High Court declined to entertain the writ petition in view of the pendency of the notification challenge before the Supreme Court, it did not grant Zoomcar liberty to avail its statutory remedy of appeal under Section 107 of the CGST Act against the adjudication order dated August 8, 2024.

It was argued that while similarly places taxpayers in other cases decided by the same High Court on August 22, 2025 had been specifically permitted to file appeals under Section 107, Zoomcar was denied the same liberty. 

Its subsequent application seeking modification of the August 21, 2025 order was also dismissed by the High Court on January 21, 2026.

During the hearing, the bench sought clarity on which orders were proposed to be challenged in appeal and whether they were adjudication orders passed under Section 73.

Upon being informed that the impugned orders were adjudication orders passed by the deputy commissioner in 2024 and that the issues were identical to those in connected matters, the court issued notice.

For Petitioner: Senior Advocate Prakash Shah assisted by Advocate Vishnu Kant AOR