https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=96800 VCES benefit denied because the declarant failed to pay the mandatory 50% pre deposit by the specified cut off date and filed a declaration barred by the second proviso to Section 106(1) for a subsequent period where an order of determination already existed; the designated authority validly rejected the declaration after due process. The tribunal held that the scheme's procedural timetable and stipulations are inviolable, that courts cannot extend amnesty timelines, and that the designated authority possesses inherent and ancillary powers to scrutinise and refuse nonconforming declarations. The appellate challenge was dismissed for lack of merit. en-us Thu, 12 Feb 2026 09:03:32 +0530 Thu, 12 Feb 2026 09:03:34 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=96800 VCES benefit denied because the declarant failed to pay the mandatory 50% pre deposit by the specified cut off date and filed a declaration barred by the second proviso to Section 106(1) for a subsequent period where an order of determination already existed; the designated authority validly rejected the declaration after due process. The tribunal held that the scheme's procedural timetable and stipulations are inviolable, that courts cannot extend amnesty timelines, and that the designated authority possesses inherent and ancillary powers to scrutinise and refuse nonconforming declarations. The appellate challenge was dismissed for lack of merit. Highlights Service Tax Thu, 12 Feb 2026 09:03:32 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=96800