JUDGMENT Sanjib Banerjee, CJ. - The application is for leave to pay an amount due to be paid on March 15, 2022 by April 4, 2022 without seeking any further concession as to the other payments due in terms of the relevant order dated December 7, 2021 passed while disposing of WP(C) No.344 of 2021. 2. The prayer is seriously objected to on behalf of the Department. According to the Department, the conduct of the applicant-assessee does not inspire any confidence and this may not be the only time that the applicant approaches this Court in an attempt to stall and ultimately not pay the input tax credit for which the applicant had obtained benefit. 3. The Department draws the attention of the Court to, inter alia, paragraphs 7 and 10 of the order of December 7, 2021 which record as follows: '7. In default of payment of any installment within the time permitted, the balance amount then due will become automatically payable and it will be open to the CGST authorities to proceed for realization thereof in accordance with law. ' '10. It is made clear that the appellant assesse will continue to pay the current GST dues without seeking any concession on account of the payment in terms of this order.' 4. In terms of the relevant order, the applicant is to pay a total amount of Rs. 43,49,50,071/- in 24 installments. Though the Department did not accede to the request for the payment to be made over 24 months, it is evident that the Department has graciously accepted the order in the hope that the huge amount outstanding would be paid in terms thereof. In such circumstances, the Department is eminently justified in objecting to the modification sought since that would rob the Department of its right to proceed for realisation of the entire sum in terms of paragraph 7 of the order dated December 7, 2021. 5. Even though the relevant order was not passed on concession or by agreement of parties, ordinarily, courts should not vary the terms of an order unless extenuating circumstances are cited. The application in this case refers to a serious incident at the manufacturing facility of the applicant, earlier this month. There appears to be some basis as to why the applicant may have been inconvenienced in making the payment due on March 15, 2022 by the appointed date. 6. The application in this case refers to a serious incident at the manufacturing facility of the applicant, earlier this month. There appears to be some basis as to why the applicant may have been inconvenienced in making the payment due on March 15, 2022 by the appointed date. 6. Accordingly, and only by way of a one-time measure, that may not be used as an instance for any further indulgence by the applicant, the time to pay the money due on March 15, 2022 is extended till April 5, 2022 without interfering with the payments due thereafter in terms of the order of December 7, 2021. 7. It is made clear that the Court may not accede to any further request of the applicant on similar lines as in the present case, notwithstanding the circumstances that may be cited. 8. MC (WPC) No. 50 of 2022 is disposed of. It should be recorded that WP(C) No. 344 of 2021 stands disposed of. 9. There will be no order as to costs.