Sameer Singh vs. State Of Uttarakhand
Facts
The petitioner, Sameer Singh, was previously before the Uttarakhand High Court in WPMB No.597 of 2025, challenging a recovery certificate for Rs. 8,96,774/-. The petitioner expressed readiness to pay the outstanding GST amount in installments, referencing Section 80 of the Central Goods and Services Act, 2017. The Court, on 25.07.2025, disposed of the earlier petition with liberty to the petitioner to approach the Commissioner for installment payments, stating no coercive action would be taken for seven working days. The petitioner is now before the Court again, alleging the department is stonewalling his attempts to secure installment payments and that his representation dated 01.08.2025 remains unconsidered.
Held
The Court held that relegating the petitioner back to the authorities to file an application in the specified Form GST DRC-20 would be a waste of time and resources, given the previous order of the Court. The Court noted that the issue of payment in installments had already been permitted. Consequently, the Court directed the petitioner to pay the balance due in 09 equal monthly installments. These payments are to commence from December 2025 and be completed by August 2026. The Court further ordered that the freeze order would be lifted after two installments are paid. The petition was disposed of accordingly.
Key Issues
1. Whether the petitioner's failure to file an application in the specified Form GST DRC-20 bars consideration for installment payments under Section 80 of the Central Goods and Services Act, 2017, despite the High Court's previous order permitting him to approach the Commissioner. Petitioner's arguments: The petitioner contends that his attempts to have his case considered for installment payments are being obstructed by the department, and his representation dated 01.08.2025 has not been acted upon. He relies on the previous order of the Court dated 25.07.2025, which allowed him to approach the Commissioner for installment payments. Revenue/State's arguments: The learned Standing Counsel for the respondents submits that the petitioner was required to make an application in the specified Form GST DRC-20, and his omission to do so has led to the current stalemate.
Sections Cited
Section 80
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
JUDGMENT:(per Sri G. Narendar, C.J.)
Heard Mr. Aayush Gaur, learned counsel for the petitioner and Ms. Puja Banga, learned Brief Holder for the State.
The instant petition has a history. The petitioner was before this Court on an earlier occasion in WPMB No.597 of 2025 and the said petition came to be disposed of by the following order passed on 25.07.2025:-
“Mr. Aayush Gaur, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. C.S. Rawat, Chief Standing Counsel, with Mr. B.S. Parihar, Additional C.S.C. and Mr. Sachin Mohan Singh Mehta, Brief Holder for the State/respondent.
The petitioner has
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 Uttarakhand High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.