Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010134612025 2025:GAU-AS:8471 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : I.A.(Civil)/2022/2025 INDIAN OIL CORP LTD (MARKETING DIVISION) A GOVT. OF INDIA ENTERPRISE HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE SITUATED AT MUMBAI AND REGIONAL OFFICE SITUATED AT 2, GARIAHAT ROAD (SOUTH), DHAKURIA KOLKATA-700068 AND HAVING ONE OF ITS STATE OFFICE AS INDIAN OIL AOD STATE OFFICE, NOONMATI GUWAHATI. THE PETITIONER IN THE PRESENT PROCEEDINGS IS BEING REP. BY MR. A PAZHANI, DGM (FINANCE) OF THE PETITIONER COMPANY VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 3 ORS REP. BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM, FINANCE (TAXATION) DEPARTMENT DISPUR, GUWAHATI-06 2:THE COMMISSIONER OF TAXES ASSAM KAR BHAVAN DISPUR GUWAHATI-06 3:THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF TAXES GUWAHATI UNIT-A KAR BHAVAN DISPUR GUWAHATI-06 Page No.# 2/3 4:SUPERINTENDENT OF TAXES GUWAHATI UNIT-A KAR BHAVAN DISPUR GUWAHATI-0 Advocate for the Petitioner : DR. ASHOK SARAF, MR P BARUAH,MR. N N DUTTA,MR S J SAIKIA,MR P K BORA,MR. G. DUTTATRAY,B SARMA Advocate for the Respondent : SC, FINANCE AND TAXATION, BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR JUSTICE ARUN DEV CHOUDHURY O R D E R 23.06.2025 1. This is an application filed for typographical correction in the order dated 05.06.2025 passed by this court in WP(C) No. 92/2024. 2. According to the learned counsel for the applicant, in the aforesaid order at paragraph No. 4, a typographical error has been occurred that as the date of the order of SLP is 11.03.2015 and not 11.03.2025. 3. Perused the application along with the order dated 05.06.2025. After perusal of the same, this court finds that the date wrongly typed as 11.03.2025 instead of 11.03.2015. 4. Accordingly, the words “Order dated 11.03.2025” is corrected by replacing the words “Order dated 11.03.2015” and the sentence be read as “as the SLP preferred against the said order has been dismissed with no interference to the Order dated 11.03.2015, passed by the Hon’ble Division Bench of this Court, the respondent No. 3 could not assume any jurisdiction to reach a finding that interest is leviable”. Page No.# 3/3 5. Accordingly, IA stands allowed. JUDGE Comparing Assistant