Pabitra Mohan Lenka vs. The Principal Commnr. CGST

Held

The Court considered the submissions made by the petitioner. It was held that the words "Rule 23 of the Odisha Goods and Services Tax Rules (OGST Rules)" as mentioned in paragraph-2 of the Court's order dated 6th November 2021, passed in W.P.(C) No.32886 of 2021, should be read as "Rule 23 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Rules (CGST Rules)". The Court found merit in the petitioner's request for this correction. Consequently, the Interlocutory Application (I.A. No.16518 of 2021) filed by the petitioner was allowed. The operative direction was to amend the previous order to reflect the correct rule. No other issues were decided.

Facts

The petitioner, Pabitra Mohan Lenka, filed a writ petition before the High Court of Orissa at Cuttack. The case involves an order passed by the Principal Commissioner, Central Goods and Service Tax (CGST) and others. The petitioner sought a correction in a previous order of the Court dated 6th November 2021, which was passed in the same writ petition (W.P.(C) No.32886 of 2021). The correction pertained to a specific rule mentioned in paragraph-2 of the Court's earlier order.

Key Issues

1. Whether the reference to "Rule 23 of the Odisha Goods and Services Tax Rules (OGST Rules)" in the Court's order dated 6th November 2021 was a typographical error and should be corrected to "Rule 23 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Rules (CGST Rules)"? Petitioner's Contention: The petitioner argued that the rule cited in the Court's previous order was incorrect and sought its substitution with the correct rule. The petitioner's counsel, Mr. S.K. Nayak, made submissions to this effect. Revenue's Contention: The judgment does not record any specific argument from the revenue or state. However, the presence of Mr. R. Chimanka, Senior Standing Counsel, suggests their involvement, likely in response to the petitioner's application.