Shree Hanumant Steel Traders vs. Assistant Commissioner
Held
The Court held that typographical errors in its previous order dated 09.09.2026 in WPT No. 11 of 2026 were apparent and required rectification. The Court found that the date of notice was indeed incorrectly mentioned as '16.10.2025' in paragraphs 1 and 6, and it should have been '18.07.2025'. Consequently, the Court ordered the modification of the previous order to correct these typographical errors. The reasoning was based on the clear identification of the errors and the need for accuracy in judicial pronouncements. The ratio decidendi is that High Courts can modify their own orders to correct manifest typographical errors to ensure accuracy and prevent misinterpretation. The operative direction was to modify the order dated 09.09.2026, rectifying the date of notice in paragraphs 1 and 6 to '18.07.2025', while keeping the rest of the order intact. No issues were left undecided.
Facts
The applicants, Shree Hanumant Steel Traders and its proprietor Shri Kamal Kishor Agrawal, filed an MCC (Miscellaneous Civil Case) seeking modification of an order previously passed by the High Court on September 9, 2026, in WPT No. 11 of 2026. The applicants pointed out typographical errors in paragraphs 1 and 6 of the original order. Specifically, the date of a notice was incorrectly stated as '16.10.2025' instead of the correct date, '18.07.2025'. The Assistant Commissioner, Circle-5, Division-1, State Goods and Services Tax, Raipur, was the non-applicant.
Key Issues
1. Whether typographical errors in the date of notice in a High Court order warrant modification of that order? The applicants argued that there were inadvertent typographical errors in the date of the notice mentioned in the High Court's previous order dated 09.09.2026 in WPT No. 11 of 2026. They contended that the date '16.10.2025' was incorrectly recorded and should be corrected to '18.07.2025' in paragraphs 1 and 6 of the said order. The State/Non-applicants did not record any specific arguments in the judgment, implying their acquiescence or lack of opposition to the modification sought.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
1
CGHC010406802026
2026:CGHC:46173
NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCC No. 1017 of 2026
Shree Hanumant Steel Traders Kanhaiya Lal Bazar Ward, Ward No. 08, Naya Talab, Gudhiyari, Raipur, C.G., 492001, Represented Through Proprietor Shri Kamal Kishor Agrawal, Aged About 41 Years S/o Shri Mahavir Prasar Agrawal, R/o Near Patahak Kirana Store, Naya Talab, Gudhiyari Raipur, Chhattisgarh 492001
Shri Kamal Kishor Agrawal S/o Shri Mahvir Prasar Agrawal Aged About 41 Years R/o Near Patahak Kirana Store, Naya Talab, Gudhiyari Raipur, Chhattisgarh 492001
... Applicant(s) versus • Assistant Commissioner Circle-5, Division - 1, State Goods And Services Tax, Civil Lines, Raipur, Chhattisgarh
... Non-Applicant For Applicants : Mr. Prashant Dansena, Advocate For State/ Non-applicants : Mr. Sharad Mishra, G.A. Hon’ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order On Board 02.11.2026
By way of the instant MCC, the applicants seeks modification in the order dated 09.09.2026, passed in WPT No. 11 of 2026 by this Court.
2
Upon perusal of the order dated 09.09.2026 p
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 Chhattisgarh High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.