https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=75822 SVLDRS - The court acknowledged that the petitioner failed to make the balance payment within the extended period due to financial constraints post-COVID-19. However, it emphasized that the petitioner did not provide substantial evidence of severe financial crunch, as claimed. - Citing a precedent set by the Supreme Court, the court affirmed that the time limit cannot be extended by the court as it would amount to modifying the scheme, a prerogative of the government or the respondent authority. The extension granted during the COVID-19 pandemic was within the authority of the government, not the court. en-us Tue, 19 Mar 2024 08:40:16 +0530 Tue, 19 Mar 2024 08:40:16 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=75822 SVLDRS - The court acknowledged that the petitioner failed to make the balance payment within the extended period due to financial constraints post-COVID-19. However, it emphasized that the petitioner did not provide substantial evidence of severe financial crunch, as claimed. - Citing a precedent set by the Supreme Court, the court affirmed that the time limit cannot be extended by the court as it would amount to modifying the scheme, a prerogative of the government or the respondent authority. The extension granted during the COVID-19 pandemic was within the authority of the government, not the court. Highlights Service Tax Tue, 19 Mar 2024 08:40:16 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=75822