Pallav Chattopadhyay And Anr vs. State Of West Bengal And Ors.
Facts
The petitioners, Pallav Chattopadhyay & Ors., approached the High Court of Calcutta in W.P.A. 9075 of 2024 against the State of West Bengal & Ors. and the CGST Authorities. The core of the petition concerned a typographical error in an order dated 8th April 2024. Specifically, the petitioners pointed out that the date mentioned in the second line of the second paragraph of the said order was incorrectly recorded as '12th June 2023' instead of the correct date, '22nd August 2023'. The petitioners sought a correction of this erroneous date. The State and CGST authorities did not oppose this prayer.
Held
The Court acknowledged the submission regarding a typographical error in the order dated 8th April 2024. The specific error identified was the incorrect transcription of a date in the second line of the second paragraph of the order. The petitioners asserted that the date '12th June 2023' was erroneously recorded and that the correct date should be '22nd August 2023'. This contention was not opposed by the learned advocates representing the State and CGST authorities. Consequently, the Court directed the concerned department to carry out the correction, ensuring that the date in the specified portion of the order dated 8th April 2024 reads '22nd August 2023'. All other portions of the order were to remain unaltered. The principle established is that High Courts can direct correction of manifest typographical errors in their own orders when such errors are brought to their notice and are not opposed by the parties.
Key Issues
1. Whether there is a typographical error in the order dated 8th April 2024, specifically concerning the date mentioned in the second line of the second paragraph, and if so, what is the correct date? Petitioner's Argument: The petitioners contended that the order dated 8th April 2024 contained a typographical error. They argued that the date '12th June 2023' appearing in the second line of the second paragraph of the order was incorrect and should be '22nd August 2023'. They prayed for the necessary correction of this date. Revenue/State's Argument: The learned advocates appearing for the State authorities and the CGST authorities submitted that they did not oppose the prayer made by the petitioners for correction of the typographical error.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
2024 Item No.3 Court No.5 Saswata W.P.A. 9075 of 2024 Pallav Chattopadhyay & Ors. -vs- State of West Bengal & Ors. Mr. Pratyush Chatterjee …For the petitioner Mr. Anirban Ray Mr. Md. T.M. Siddiqui Mr. Saptak Sanyal Mr. N.Chatterjee …For the State Mr. Kaushik Dey Ms. Ekta Sinha …For the CGST Authorities
Mr. Chatterjee, learned advocate appearing for the petitioners submits that in the order dated 8th April 2024 there appears to be a typographical error in the second line of the second paragraph of the first page.
It is submitted that the date of the order as appearing in the second line of the second paragraph of the first page of the order dated 8th April 2024 has been incorrectly transcribed as “12th June 2023” in place of 22nd August 2023. He prays for necessary correction.
The same is not opposed by the learned advocates appearing for the State authorities and the CGST authorities.
In view thereof, the date as appearing in the second line of the second paragraph of the order dated 8th April 2024 is corrected to read as 22nd August 2023. 5. Department is directed to carry out the aforesaid correction in the order dated 8th April 2023. 6. Other portion of the or
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.