Smti Gichak Daniam vs. The Union Of INDIA And 2 Ors

Facts

The petitioner, Smti Gichak Daniam, is a registered assessee under the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. She was informed by the respondent authorities of a GST liability amounting to Rs. 5,79,31,327.26. The petitioner has paid Rs. 1,05,31,034/-, leaving a balance of Rs. 4,74,00,293.26. The petitioner claims to be under pressure from the respondent authorities to pay the outstanding amount immediately and faces threats of coercive action. Due to financial constraints, the petitioner is unable to pay the entire balance in one lump sum. Consequently, she filed a representation on May 26, 2025, before the Commissioner of Central Goods and Services Tax (Respondent No. 2) seeking permission to pay the balance amount in instalments, but this representation has not yet received a response.

Held

The Court held that the respondent authorities should dispose of the petitioner's representation dated May 26, 2025, within a period of three weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of the order. This disposal must be a reasoned order, taking into account the provision of Section 80 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, and the petitioner's financial liability. The Court also directed that until the representation is disposed of, no coercive action should be taken against the petitioner by Respondent No. 2. The reasoning is based on the petitioner's submission regarding her financial inability to pay the entire outstanding amount in one go and the existence of Section 80 of the Act, which allows for instalment payments. The respondent authorities' lack of objection further supported this direction. The ratio decidendi is that statutory provisions allowing for deferred payment should be considered by authorities when faced with genuine financial hardship, and representations made under such provisions must be addressed with reasoned orders.

Key Issues

1. Whether the respondent authorities are obligated to consider the petitioner's representation for payment of GST dues in instalments under Section 80 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, given her financial difficulties? Petitioner's Argument: The petitioner contends that Section 80 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, permits the Commissioner to allow payment of tax and other amounts in instalments, not exceeding twenty-four months, for reasons to be recorded in writing. She argues that her representation dated May 26, 2025, seeking instalment payments due to her financial condition, should be considered and disposed of in light of this provision. Revenue's Argument: The respondent authorities (Union of India, Commissioner of CGST, and Assistant Commissioner) stated that they have no objection if the petition is disposed of with a direction to decide the petitioner's representation.