Lnj Bhilwara Heg Lok Nyas vs. Commissioner Of Income Tax( Exemption)

WP/41823/2025HC Madhya Pradesh31 October 2025Bench: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE2 pages

For Petitioner: Ritwik Parashar[P-1]For Respondent: Advocate General[R-1]

AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that there was a typographical error in its order dated 30.10.2025. The application for correction (I.A. No. 20910/2025) was allowed. The Court clarified that the petitioner is granted liberty to furnish the bank guarantee within four weeks from 30.10.2025. Crucially, it was further clarified that the undertaking given by M/s HEG Limited would be subject to such remedies as may be permissible in law, in case the petitioner is aggrieved by the order passed by the appellate authority. This ensures that the petitioner's right to challenge the appellate order through appropriate legal channels is explicitly preserved. The corrected order is to be read in conjunction with the order dated 30.10.2025.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, LNJ BHILWARA HEG LOK NYAS, filed an application (I.A. No. 20910 of 2025) seeking correction of an order dated 30.10.2025 passed by the High Court of Madhya Pradesh. The petitioner contended that while the previous order granted four weeks' time to furnish a bank guarantee and recorded an undertaking by M/s HEG Limited to honor the appellate authority's order, it did not specifically mention the petitioner's right to pursue further legal remedies. The respondents, Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption) and others, were represented by their standing counsel. The High Court noted a typographical error in its previous order.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the order dated 30.10.2025, which granted time to furnish a bank guarantee and recorded an undertaking, sufficiently preserved the petitioner's right to take recourse to legal remedies against the appellate authority's order? (Question of law and fact, concerning procedural fairness and preservation of rights). Assessee's Contention: The petitioner argued that the previous order, while mentioning the undertaking, failed to explicitly state the petitioner's right to pursue further legal remedies, which should have been included for clarity and to safeguard their legal recourse. Revenue's Contention: The judgment records that notice was issued and accepted by the learned counsel for the respondents, but it does not explicitly detail any specific arguments or contentions raised by the revenue regarding the correction application.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA, CHIEF JUSTICE & HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VINAY SARAF ON THE 31st OF OCTOBER, 2025 WRIT PETITION No. 41823 of 2025 LNJ BHILWARA HEG LOK NYAS Versus COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX( EXEMPTION) AND OTHERS Appearance: Shri Yogendra Aldak and Shri Ritwik Parashar - Advocates for petitioner. Shri Harpreet Singh Gupta - Standing Counsel for Income Tax (through video conferencing). ORDER Per: Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjeev Sachdeva, Chief Justice I.A.No. 20910 of 2025 (an application for correction of order dated 30.10.2025). Issue notice. Notice is accepted by learned counsel appearing for respondents. This is an application for correction of order dated 30.10.2025. It is submitted that this Court had granted four weeks' time to furnish the bank guarantee and further it is submitted that the order records that an undertaking shall be given by M/s HEG Limited that it shall honour the order passed by the appellate authority. However, the right of the petitioner to take recourse to legal remedies have not been specifically mentioned. 1 WP-41823-2025 NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:54617 Signed by: MONIKA CHOURASIA Signing time: 31-10-2025 13:27:13 Signature Not Verified

(SANJEEV SACHDEVA) CHIEF JUSTICE (VINAY SARAF) JUDGE We note that there is a typographical error in the order dated 30.10.2025. I.A. No. 20910/2025 is allowed and the order, is accordingly, corrected. Petitioner is given liberty to furnish the bank guarantee within a period of four weeks from 30.10.2025. It is further clarified that the undertaking shall be subject to such remedies as may be permissible in law, in case the petitioner is aggrieved by the order passed by the appellate authority. This order shall be read with in conjunction with order dated 30.10.2025. C.C. today. m/-

2 WP-41823-2025 NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:54617 Signed by: MONIKA CHOURASIA Signing time: 31-10-2025 13:27:13 Signature Not Verified

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →