Uttarakhand High Court
WPMS/695/2022 on 6 November, 2025
Author: Manoj Kumar Tiwari
Bench: Manoj Kumar Tiwari
Office Notes,
reports, orders
SL. or proceedings
Date COURT'S OR JUDGES'S ORDERS
No or directions and
Registrar's order
with Signatures
WPMS No. 692 of 2022
With
WPMS No. 695 of 2022
Hon'ble Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J
1. Mr. Bhupesh Kandpal, learned counsel
for the petitioners.
2. Mr. C.S. Rawat, learned Chief Standing
Counsel for the State of
Uttarakhand/applicant.
3. In the interest of justice, delay in filing
the recall application(s) are hereby
condoned. Accordingly, the delay
condonation applications (IA No. 3 of 2022
and IA No. 3 of 2022) are allowed.
4. These petitions were disposed of vide
judgment dated 26.04.2022. Operative
portion of the said judgment is extracted
below:-
"Considering the fact that since the liability of the
balance amount due to be paid by the petitioner is
not disputed by the petitioner, coupled with the fact
that it is a statement made on affidavit by the
petitioner that he has partially paid the amount for
the respective assessment years, as referred above.
The writ petition is being disposed of, subject to
the condition that the petitioner moves a proper
application under section 75 (2) of the Act, before
the competent authority, within a period of one
month from the date of the receipt of the certified
copy of this order, the competent authority would
rationally consider, to pass an appropriate order
under Section 75 (2) of the Act, in order to enable
the petitioner to remit the balance amount in easy
instalments, which is contemplated in itself as per the
provisions contained under Section 75 (2) of the Act.
It is expected, that the decision on the application
filed by the petitioner under Section 75 (2) of the
Act, would be considered and an appropriate
direction for fixation of the schedule of the payment
of the instalments would be passed by the competent
authority within the one month from the date of the
receipt of the application under sub-section (2) of
Section 75 of the Act.
Subject to the aforesaid observations and the
exception carved out by this Court, the writ petition
stands disposed of.
It is goes without saying that before any decision
is taken by the respondent on the petitioner's
application, no coercive action in pursuance to the
steps already taken for the time being would be
resorted to till the decision is taken for fixation of the
instalments, to be paid by the petitioner."
5. Today, the matters are listed on
applications, seeking recall of the said order
filed by State Government. Section 75(2) of
Uttarakhand Value Added Tax Act, 2005
enables the Commissioner or the State
Government to permit any dealer or other
person, against whom any amount of tax
penalty or other dues is outstanding, to pay
the amount in such number of monthly
instalments, as it may consider proper in
the circumstances of the case. Thus,
Section 75(2) of the Act is an enabling
provision.
6. Coordinate Bench had directed the
State Government to take a decision on
petitioners' applications moved under
Section 75(2) of the Act.
7. This Court do not find any illegality or
infirmity in the judgment dated 26.04.2022,
which is sought to be recalled.
8. Accordingly, the prayer for recall of the
judgment is misconceived. The recall
applications (MCC No. 2 of 2022 and MCC
No. 2 of 2022) are, accordingly, rejected.
(Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J)
06.11.2025
Aswal
