https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=762889 The HC dismissed the petitioner's challenge to an order requiring additional payment under the SVLDRS scheme. The petitioner contested the calculation of pre-deposit deductions and claimed misstatement in their declaration form. The court found that the petitioner failed to disprove findings regarding CENVAT credit utilization dates and could not produce documents supporting their claim of payment before specified dates. The court held that late filing of returns, ambiguities, and misstatements supported the respondent's conclusions. The determination was neither perverse nor unfair, and no legal provisions were breached. en-us Mon, 09 Dec 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 10 Dec 2024 08:58:15 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=762889 The HC dismissed the petitioner's challenge to an order requiring additional payment under the SVLDRS scheme. The petitioner contested the calculation of pre-deposit deductions and claimed misstatement in their declaration form. The court found that the petitioner failed to disprove findings regarding CENVAT credit utilization dates and could not produce documents supporting their claim of payment before specified dates. The court held that late filing of returns, ambiguities, and misstatements supported the respondent's conclusions. The determination was neither perverse nor unfair, and no legal provisions were breached. Case-Laws Service Tax Mon, 09 Dec 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=762889