Axiom Cordages LTD. vs. Union Of INDIA Through The Secretary And Ors.

WP/8094/2018HC BombayGSTCNR HCBM01033438201816 August 2018Bench: HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE BHARATI DANGRE,HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE S.C. DHARMADHIKARI1 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

Held

The Court decided to allow the praecipe for speaking to the minutes of the order. The Court found that there was a clerical error in the original order dated August 16, 2018, regarding the identification of the respondent authorities. The Court reasoned that correcting these designations would ensure the order accurately reflects the relevant authorities involved in the matter. Consequently, the Court ordered the substitution of "Assistant Commissioner of Central GST and Central Excise, Division-IV, Palghar Commissionerate" with "Principal Commissioner of Customs (Preventive), Nhava Sheva (R&I)" in paragraph 2, and "The jurisdictional Central GST and Central Excise Officers" with "Principal Commissioner of Customs (Preventive), Nhava Sheva (R&I)" in paragraph 3. The ratio decidendi is that courts have the power to correct clerical errors in their orders to ensure accuracy and proper identification of parties or authorities. No other issues were decided, and the praecipe was disposed of.

Facts

This matter concerns a praecipe filed for speaking to the minutes of an order dated August 16, 2018, before the Bombay High Court. The petitioner, Axiom Cordages Ltd., sought corrections to the order. Specifically, the petitioner requested the substitution of "Assistant Commissioner of Central GST and Central Excise, Division-IV, Palghar Commissionerate" with "Principal Commissioner of Customs (Preventive), Nhava Sheva (R&I)" in paragraph 2 of the order. Similarly, in paragraph 3, the phrase "The jurisdictional Central GST and Central Excise Officers" was to be replaced with "Principal Commissioner of Customs (Preventive), Nhava Sheva (R&I)". No other clerical errors or ambiguities were brought to the court's attention.

Key Issues

1. Whether the names of the respondent authorities in the court's order dated August 16, 2018, accurately reflect the correct jurisdictional authority for the purpose of the proceedings. This issue arises from the petitioner's request to amend the order to reflect a change in the designation and name of the relevant authority. The petitioner argued for the substitution to ensure the order correctly identifies the Principal Commissioner of Customs (Preventive), Nhava Sheva (R&I) as the appropriate respondent. The revenue or State's contentions are not recorded in the judgment.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Praecipe-WP.8094.2018.doc IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 8094 OF 2018 Axiom Cordages Ltd. } Petitioner versus Union of India and Ors. } Respondents Mr. Brijesh Pathak for the petitioner. CORAM :- S. C. DHARMADHIKARI & SMT. BHARATI H. DANGRE, JJ. DATE :- SEPTEMBER, 6, 2018 P.C. :-

1.

The praecipe is filed for speaking to the minutes of order dated 16th August, 2018. 2. In the order, in para 2, the words “Assistant Commissioner of Central GST and Central Excise, Division-IV, Palghar Commissionerate” shall be substituted by the words “Principal Commissioner of Customs (Preventive), Nhava Sheva (R&I)” and in para 3, the words “The jurisdictional Central GST and Central Excise Officers” shall be substituted by the words “Principal Commissioner of Customs (Preventive), Nhava Sheva (R&I)”

3.

No other clerical error or ambiguity is pointed out. The order stands corrected accordingly. The praecipe is disposed of. (SMT. BHARATI H. DANGRE, J.) (S.C.DHARMADHIKARI, J.) J.V.Salunke,PA Jayant Vishwanath Salunke Jayant Vishwanath Salunke Date: 2018.09.07 17:35:07 +0530

The judgment continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full GST judgments a month (one account works on both bharattax.net and this site). Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

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