M/S Cart Infralog Limited And Anr vs. The Addl. Commissioner, Hq Anti Evasion Unit, CGST And Cx, Kolkata South Commissionerate And Ors
Held
The Court held that a correction was necessary to the order dated August 27, 2026. The specific correction involved amending paragraph 21, sub-paragraph III. The Court directed that the phrase 'petitioners within a period of four weeks from the date of communication of this order' should be replaced with 'petitioners within a period of four weeks from the date of making payment as directed in paragraph 22'. The reasoning behind this correction was to ensure the timeline for the petitioners' compliance was tied to their payment obligations as previously stipulated, rather than the mere communication of the order. The operative direction was to incorporate this correction into the original order, making the corrected order effective when read in conjunction with the original. No issues were expressly left undecided.
Facts
This judgment concerns a correction to a previous order dated August 27, 2026, issued by the High Court at Calcutta in a writ petition. The petitioner is M/s. Cart Infralog Ltd. & Anr., and the respondent is the Additional Commissioner, HQ Anti-Evasion Unit, COST & CX, Kolkata South Commissionerate & Ors. The correction pertains to a specific phrase within paragraph 21 of the original order. The original order directed the petitioners to take action within four weeks from the date of communication of the order. The corrected order now specifies that the action should be taken within four weeks from the date of making payment as directed in paragraph 22 of the original order. The rest of the original order remains unchanged.
Key Issues
The primary issue before the Court was to correct a clerical error in its previous order dated August 27, 2026. Specifically, the Court had to decide whether to amend the timeline for the petitioners' action from 'date of communication of this order' to 'date of making payment as directed in paragraph 22'. The petitioner sought this correction to accurately reflect the intended timeline for compliance. The CGST Authority was represented, and no specific arguments from their side regarding this correction were recorded in the judgment. The Court was essentially correcting its own record to ensure clarity and proper implementation of its prior directions.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
03 02.09.2026 Court No. 10 AGM/SM In The High Court At Calcutta Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction Appellate Side
W.P.A. 16556 of 2025
M/s. Cart Infralog Ltd. & Anr. -versus The Additional Commissioner, HQ Anti-Evasion Unit, COST & CX, Kolkata South Commissionerate & Ors.
Mr. Ankit Kanodia. Ms. Megha Agarwal. Ms. Tulika Roy Mr. Shovan Ojha.
…For the Petitioners.
Mr. Uday Sankar Bhattacharya. Mr. Tapan Bhanja.
… For the CGST Authority.
The matter has appeared in the list under the heading „To Be Mentioned‟ for correction of the order dated 27th August, 2026. 2. In the fifth line of sub-para-III of the paragraph no. 21, the words shall be read as “petitioners within a period of four weeks from the date of making payment as directed in paragraph 22” in place and stead of “petitioners within a period of four weeks from the date of communication of this order.”
The remaining part of the said order will remain unaltered.
Let the order dated 27th August, 2026 be read along with today‟s order.
Urgent photostat certified copy of this order be supplied to the parties, if applied for, as early as pos
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.
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 Calcutta High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.