{"id":5374,"date":"2025-08-18T17:27:27","date_gmt":"2025-08-18T11:57:27","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.centaxonline.com\/blog\/?p=5374"},"modified":"2025-08-19T08:10:59","modified_gmt":"2025-08-19T02:40:59","slug":"bombay-hc-orders-svldrs-reconsideration-on-tax-dues","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.centaxonline.com\/blog\/bombay-hc-orders-svldrs-reconsideration-on-tax-dues","title":{"rendered":"Bombay HC Orders SVLDRS Reconsideration on Tax Dues"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<pre>Case Details: <a href=\"https:\/\/www.centaxonline.com\/latest-news-updates\/excise-service-tax\/101010000000402168\/dept-is-directed-to-reconsider-assessees-svldrs-application-due-to-inadvertent-rejection-based-on-wrong-info\"><span class=\"TextRun SCXW214791605 BCX0\" lang=\"EN-IN\" xml:lang=\"EN-IN\" data-contrast=\"none\"><span class=\"NormalTextRun SCXW214791605 BCX0\" data-ccp-parastyle=\"Body-All Documents\" data-ccp-parastyle-defn=\"{&quot;ObjectId&quot;:&quot;f54e3151-7552-5563-bc14-dd1598e94375|1&quot;,&quot;ClassId&quot;:1073872969,&quot;Properties&quot;:[469775450,&quot;Body-All Documents&quot;,201340122,&quot;2&quot;,134234082,&quot;true&quot;,134233614,&quot;true&quot;,469778129,&quot;Body-AllDocuments&quot;,335572020,&quot;1&quot;,469777841,&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;,469777842,&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,469777844,&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;,469769226,&quot;Book Antiqua,Times New Roman&quot;,335551500,&quot;0&quot;,134233111,&quot;true&quot;,335559740,&quot;280&quot;,201341983,&quot;1&quot;,335559739,&quot;0&quot;,335551550,&quot;6&quot;,335551620,&quot;6&quot;,201342446,&quot;1&quot;,201342447,&quot;5&quot;,201342448,&quot;1&quot;,201342449,&quot;1&quot;,469777843,&quot;Calibri&quot;,201341986,&quot;1&quot;,268442635,&quot;24&quot;]}\">Kaarya Facilities &amp; Services Ltd. Versus<\/span> <span class=\"NormalTextRun SCXW214791605 BCX0\" data-ccp-parastyle=\"Body-All Documents\">Union of India<\/span><span class=\"NormalTextRun SCXW214791605 BCX0\" data-ccp-parastyle=\"Body-All Documents\"> (2025) 33 Centax 42 (Bom.)<\/span><\/span><\/a><span class=\"EOP SCXW214791605 BCX0\" data-ccp-props=\"{&quot;201341983&quot;:1,&quot;335551550&quot;:6,&quot;335551620&quot;:6,&quot;335559739&quot;:0,&quot;335559740&quot;:280}\">\u00a0<\/span><\/pre>\n<h2><em>Judiciary and Counsel Details<\/em><\/h2>\n<ul>\n<li><strong><span id=\"111170000000026411\">M.S. Sonak<\/span><\/strong>\u00a0and\u00a0<strong><span id=\"111170000000019375\">Jitendra Jain<\/span>, JJ<\/strong>.<\/li>\n<li><i><strong>S\/Shri\u00a0<span id=\"111170000000112679\">Akash Rebello<\/span><\/strong>\u00a0<strong>a\/w.\u00a0<span id=\"111170000000166931\">Nadeem Sharma<\/span>,\u00a0<span id=\"111170000000166932\">Paras Gosar<\/span>\u00a0i\/b.\u00a0<span id=\"111170000000126509\">Shouvik Kumar Roy<\/span><\/strong>, for the Petitioner<\/i><\/li>\n<li><i><strong>S\/Shri\u00a0<span id=\"111170000000019368\">Jitendra B. Mishra<\/span>\u00a0a\/w.\u00a0<span id=\"111170000000086150\">Ashutosh Mishra<\/span><\/strong>\u00a0and\u00a0<strong><span id=\"111170000000122294\">Rupesh Dubey<\/span><\/strong>, for the Respondent<\/i><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<h2><em>Facts of the Case<\/em><\/h2>\n<p><span class=\"TextRun SCXW206462857 BCX0\" lang=\"EN-IN\" xml:lang=\"EN-IN\" data-contrast=\"none\"><span class=\"NormalTextRun SCXW206462857 BCX0\" data-ccp-parastyle=\"Body-All Documents\" data-ccp-parastyle-defn=\"{&quot;ObjectId&quot;:&quot;f54e3151-7552-5563-bc14-dd1598e94375|1&quot;,&quot;ClassId&quot;:1073872969,&quot;Properties&quot;:[469775450,&quot;Body-All Documents&quot;,201340122,&quot;2&quot;,134234082,&quot;true&quot;,134233614,&quot;true&quot;,469778129,&quot;Body-AllDocuments&quot;,335572020,&quot;1&quot;,469777841,&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;,469777842,&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,469777844,&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;,469769226,&quot;Book Antiqua,Times New Roman&quot;,335551500,&quot;0&quot;,134233111,&quot;true&quot;,335559740,&quot;280&quot;,201341983,&quot;1&quot;,335559739,&quot;0&quot;,335551550,&quot;6&quot;,335551620,&quot;6&quot;,201342446,&quot;1&quot;,201342447,&quot;5&quot;,201342448,&quot;1&quot;,201342449,&quot;1&quot;,469777843,&quot;Calibri&quot;,201341986,&quot;1&quot;,268442635,&quot;24&quot;]}\">The petitioner, engaged in proceedings under the Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme, 2019,<\/span><span class=\"NormalTextRun SCXW206462857 BCX0\" data-ccp-parastyle=\"Body-All Documents\"> was subjected to investigation <\/span><span class=\"NormalTextRun SCXW206462857 BCX0\" data-ccp-parastyle=\"Body-All Documents\">wherein the director admitted short-paid Service Tax liability, while the jurisdictional officer under CGST, in an affidavit in reply, stated a lower figure. The Department rejected the petitioner\u2019s SVLDRS application on the ground that tax dues had not been quantified on or before the prescribed cut-off date under Section 2(r) of the Finance (No. 2) Act, 2019. The petitioner contended that such rejection was <\/span><span class=\"NormalTextRun SCXW206462857 BCX0\" data-ccp-parastyle=\"Body-All Documents\">contrary to CBIC <\/span><\/span><span class=\"TextRun SCXW206462857 BCX0\" lang=\"EN-IN\" xml:lang=\"EN-IN\" data-contrast=\"none\"><span class=\"NormalTextRun SCXW206462857 BCX0\" data-ccp-parastyle=\"Body-All Documents\">\u2018Circular No. 1071\/4\/2019-CX.8, dated 27-08-2019\u2019<\/span><\/span><span class=\"TextRun SCXW206462857 BCX0\" lang=\"EN-IN\" xml:lang=\"EN-IN\" data-contrast=\"none\"><span class=\"NormalTextRun SCXW206462857 BCX0\" data-ccp-parastyle=\"Body-All Documents\"> and the Department\u2019s answers to <\/span><\/span><span class=\"TextRun SCXW206462857 BCX0\" lang=\"EN-IN\" xml:lang=\"EN-IN\" data-contrast=\"none\"><span class=\"NormalTextRun SCXW206462857 BCX0\" data-ccp-parastyle=\"Body-All Documents\">Frequently Asked Questions dated 24-12-2019<\/span><\/span><span class=\"TextRun SCXW206462857 BCX0\" lang=\"EN-IN\" xml:lang=\"EN-IN\" data-contrast=\"none\"><span class=\"NormalTextRun SCXW206462857 BCX0\" data-ccp-parastyle=\"Body-All Documents\">, both of which clarified that <\/span><\/span><span class=\"TextRun SCXW206462857 BCX0\" lang=\"EN-IN\" xml:lang=\"EN-IN\" data-contrast=\"none\"><span class=\"NormalTextRun SCXW206462857 BCX0\" data-ccp-parastyle=\"Body-All Documents\">\u2018written communication\u2019 <\/span><\/span><span class=\"TextRun SCXW206462857 BCX0\" lang=\"EN-IN\" xml:lang=\"EN-IN\" data-contrast=\"none\"><span class=\"NormalTextRun SCXW206462857 BCX0\" data-ccp-parastyle=\"Body-All Documents\">under Section 2(r) included a letter intimating duty demand or liability admitted during enquiry, investigation, or audit. It was submitted that the admitted and recorded liability constituted quantification before the cut-off date, and that the Department\u2019s approach amounted to non-consideration of binding clarifications. The Department opposed the petition citing delay and laches, and alternatively sought imposition of reasonable interest in case relief was granted. The matter was accordingly placed before the High Court.<\/span><\/span><span class=\"EOP SCXW206462857 BCX0\" data-ccp-props=\"{&quot;201341983&quot;:1,&quot;335551550&quot;:6,&quot;335551620&quot;:6,&quot;335559739&quot;:0,&quot;335559740&quot;:280}\">\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<h2><i>High Court Held<\/i><\/h2>\n<p><span class=\"TextRun SCXW58177956 BCX0\" lang=\"EN-IN\" xml:lang=\"EN-IN\" data-contrast=\"none\"><span class=\"NormalTextRun SCXW58177956 BCX0\" data-ccp-parastyle=\"Body-All Documents\" data-ccp-parastyle-defn=\"{&quot;ObjectId&quot;:&quot;f54e3151-7552-5563-bc14-dd1598e94375|1&quot;,&quot;ClassId&quot;:1073872969,&quot;Properties&quot;:[469775450,&quot;Body-All Documents&quot;,201340122,&quot;2&quot;,134234082,&quot;true&quot;,134233614,&quot;true&quot;,469778129,&quot;Body-AllDocuments&quot;,335572020,&quot;1&quot;,469777841,&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;,469777842,&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,469777844,&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;,469769226,&quot;Book Antiqua,Times New Roman&quot;,335551500,&quot;0&quot;,134233111,&quot;true&quot;,335559740,&quot;280&quot;,201341983,&quot;1&quot;,335559739,&quot;0&quot;,335551550,&quot;6&quot;,335551620,&quot;6&quot;,201342446,&quot;1&quot;,201342447,&quot;5&quot;,201342448,&quot;1&quot;,201342449,&quot;1&quot;,469777843,&quot;Calibri&quot;,201341986,&quot;1&quot;,268442635,&quot;24&quot;]}\">The High Court held that the petition had not been filed after such unreasonable delay as to create vested or parallel rights in favour of the Department of Revenue, noting that part of the intervening period was impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic. Upon examining the affidavit in reply and the director\u2019s admission in the context of \u2018<\/span><\/span><span class=\"TextRun SCXW58177956 BCX0\" lang=\"EN-IN\" xml:lang=\"EN-IN\" data-contrast=\"none\"><span class=\"NormalTextRun SCXW58177956 BCX0\" data-ccp-parastyle=\"Body-All Documents\">Circular No. 1071\/4\/2019-CX.8, dated 27-08-2019<\/span><\/span><span class=\"TextRun SCXW58177956 BCX0\" lang=\"EN-IN\" xml:lang=\"EN-IN\" data-contrast=\"none\"><span class=\"NormalTextRun SCXW58177956 BCX0\" data-ccp-parastyle=\"Body-All Documents\">\u2019 and the Department\u2019s answers to Frequently Asked Questions dated 24-12-2019, the Court found that the Service Tax dues stood quantified prior to the statutory cut-off date as required by Section 2(r) of the Finance (No. 2) Act, 2019. It was further held that the lower quantification in the Department\u2019s affidavit, as compared to the director\u2019s admission, could not be a ground to disqualify the petitioner from the Scheme\u2019s benefits. While granting equitable relief, the Court directed that the petitioner pay simple interest at 6% per annum from the date following the permissible payment period until actual payment, noting that the petitioner had retained and used the amount for several years. The matter was remanded to the jurisdictional officer under CGST for reconsideration of the SVLDRS application and fresh computation of the amount payable with applicable interest.<\/span><\/span><span class=\"EOP SCXW58177956 BCX0\" data-ccp-props=\"{&quot;201341983&quot;:1,&quot;335551550&quot;:6,&quot;335551620&quot;:6,&quot;335559739&quot;:0,&quot;335559740&quot;:280}\">\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<h2>List Of Case Cited<\/h2>\n<ul>\n<li>Kundan Industries Ltd. v. Union of India \u2014 Writ Petition No. 5943 of 2021, decided on 1-4-2022 by Bombay High Court<\/li>\n<li><a href=\"https:\/\/www.centaxonline.com\/search?searchData=2021%20(47)%20G.S.T.L.%2020%20(Bom.)&amp;itemType=AP\">Landmark Associates v. Union of India \u2014<\/a> 2021 (47) G.S.T.L. 20 (Bom.)<\/li>\n<li><a href=\"https:\/\/www.centaxonline.com\/search?searchData=2020%20(43)%20G.S.T.L.%20499%20(Bom.)&amp;itemType=AP\">Thought Blurb v. Union of India<\/a> \u2014 2020 (43) G.S.T.L. 499 (Bom.)<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>&nbsp; Case Details: Kaarya Facilities &amp; Services Ltd. Versus Union of India&hellip;<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":10,"featured_media":5396,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[49,51,63],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-5374","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-excise-service-tax","category-news-excise-service-tax","category-est-case-chronicles"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v25.9 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/wordpress\/plugins\/seo\/ -->\n<title>Bombay HC Orders SVLDRS Reconsideration on Tax Dues<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"Bombay High Court in Kaarya Facilities &amp; Services Ltd. v. Union of India clarifies SVLDRS quantification under Section 2(r) Finance Act 2019, holding dues admitted during investigation as valid quantification before the cut-off date.\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.centaxonline.com\/blog\/bombay-hc-orders-svldrs-reconsideration-on-tax-dues\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Bombay HC Orders SVLDRS Reconsideration on Tax Dues\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Bombay High Court in Kaarya Facilities &amp; Services Ltd. v. Union of India clarifies SVLDRS quantification under Section 2(r) Finance Act 2019, holding dues admitted during investigation as valid quantification before the cut-off date.\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.centaxonline.com\/blog\/bombay-hc-orders-svldrs-reconsideration-on-tax-dues\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Centax-Blogs\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/centaxindia\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2025-08-18T11:57:27+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2025-08-19T02:40:59+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.centaxonline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/3.-Bombay-HC-Orders-SVLDRS-Reconsideration-Tax-Dues-Quantified-Before-Cut-off-Date.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"920\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"540\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Karan Negi\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Karan Negi\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"3 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.centaxonline.com\/blog\/bombay-hc-orders-svldrs-reconsideration-on-tax-dues#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.centaxonline.com\/blog\/bombay-hc-orders-svldrs-reconsideration-on-tax-dues\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Karan Negi\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.centaxonline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/2f5cfb3484d9dd23108a76636b12e805\"},\"headline\":\"Bombay HC Orders SVLDRS Reconsideration on Tax Dues\",\"datePublished\":\"2025-08-18T11:57:27+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2025-08-19T02:40:59+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.centaxonline.com\/blog\/bombay-hc-orders-svldrs-reconsideration-on-tax-dues\"},\"wordCount\":488,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.centaxonline.com\/blog\/#organization\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.centaxonline.com\/blog\/bombay-hc-orders-svldrs-reconsideration-on-tax-dues#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.centaxonline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/3.-Bombay-HC-Orders-SVLDRS-Reconsideration-Tax-Dues-Quantified-Before-Cut-off-Date.jpg\",\"articleSection\":[\"Excise &amp; Service Tax\",\"News\",\"Case Chronicles\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.centaxonline.com\/blog\/bombay-hc-orders-svldrs-reconsideration-on-tax-dues#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.centaxonline.com\/blog\/bombay-hc-orders-svldrs-reconsideration-on-tax-dues\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.centaxonline.com\/blog\/bombay-hc-orders-svldrs-reconsideration-on-tax-dues\",\"name\":\"Bombay HC Orders SVLDRS Reconsideration on Tax Dues\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.centaxonline.com\/blog\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.centaxonline.com\/blog\/bombay-hc-orders-svldrs-reconsideration-on-tax-dues#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.centaxonline.com\/blog\/bombay-hc-orders-svldrs-reconsideration-on-tax-dues#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.centaxonline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/3.-Bombay-HC-Orders-SVLDRS-Reconsideration-Tax-Dues-Quantified-Before-Cut-off-Date.jpg\",\"datePublished\":\"2025-08-18T11:57:27+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2025-08-19T02:40:59+00:00\",\"description\":\"Bombay High Court in Kaarya Facilities & Services Ltd. v. Union of India clarifies SVLDRS quantification under Section 2(r) Finance Act 2019, holding dues admitted during investigation as valid quantification before the cut-off date.\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.centaxonline.com\/blog\/bombay-hc-orders-svldrs-reconsideration-on-tax-dues#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.centaxonline.com\/blog\/bombay-hc-orders-svldrs-reconsideration-on-tax-dues\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.centaxonline.com\/blog\/bombay-hc-orders-svldrs-reconsideration-on-tax-dues#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.centaxonline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/3.-Bombay-HC-Orders-SVLDRS-Reconsideration-Tax-Dues-Quantified-Before-Cut-off-Date.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.centaxonline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/3.-Bombay-HC-Orders-SVLDRS-Reconsideration-Tax-Dues-Quantified-Before-Cut-off-Date.jpg\",\"width\":920,\"height\":540,\"caption\":\"SVLDRS application rejection\"},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.centaxonline.com\/blog\/bombay-hc-orders-svldrs-reconsideration-on-tax-dues#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.centaxonline.com\/blog\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Bombay HC Orders SVLDRS Reconsideration on Tax Dues\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.centaxonline.com\/blog\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.centaxonline.com\/blog\/\",\"name\":\"Centax-Blogs\",\"description\":\"\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.centaxonline.com\/blog\/#organization\"},\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.centaxonline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.centaxonline.com\/blog\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Centax-Blogs\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.centaxonline.com\/blog\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.centaxonline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.centaxonline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/12\/CNETAX-LOGO-1.webp\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.centaxonline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/12\/CNETAX-LOGO-1.webp\",\"width\":536,\"height\":133,\"caption\":\"Centax-Blogs\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.centaxonline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/centaxindia\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.centaxonline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/2f5cfb3484d9dd23108a76636b12e805\",\"name\":\"Karan Negi\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.centaxonline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/7735cfc607e8d5f19ef8fc2b92925d90?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/7735cfc607e8d5f19ef8fc2b92925d90?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Karan Negi\"},\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.centaxonline.com\/blog\/author\/karan\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Bombay HC Orders SVLDRS Reconsideration on Tax Dues","description":"Bombay High Court in Kaarya Facilities & Services Ltd. v. Union of India clarifies SVLDRS quantification under Section 2(r) Finance Act 2019, holding dues admitted during investigation as valid quantification before the cut-off date.","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.centaxonline.com\/blog\/bombay-hc-orders-svldrs-reconsideration-on-tax-dues","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Bombay HC Orders SVLDRS Reconsideration on Tax Dues","og_description":"Bombay High Court in Kaarya Facilities & Services Ltd. v. Union of India clarifies SVLDRS quantification under Section 2(r) Finance Act 2019, holding dues admitted during investigation as valid quantification before the cut-off date.","og_url":"https:\/\/www.centaxonline.com\/blog\/bombay-hc-orders-svldrs-reconsideration-on-tax-dues","og_site_name":"Centax-Blogs","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/centaxindia","article_published_time":"2025-08-18T11:57:27+00:00","article_modified_time":"2025-08-19T02:40:59+00:00","og_image":[{"width":920,"height":540,"url":"https:\/\/www.centaxonline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/3.-Bombay-HC-Orders-SVLDRS-Reconsideration-Tax-Dues-Quantified-Before-Cut-off-Date.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Karan Negi","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Karan Negi","Est. reading time":"3 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.centaxonline.com\/blog\/bombay-hc-orders-svldrs-reconsideration-on-tax-dues#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.centaxonline.com\/blog\/bombay-hc-orders-svldrs-reconsideration-on-tax-dues"},"author":{"name":"Karan Negi","@id":"https:\/\/www.centaxonline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/2f5cfb3484d9dd23108a76636b12e805"},"headline":"Bombay HC Orders SVLDRS Reconsideration on Tax Dues","datePublished":"2025-08-18T11:57:27+00:00","dateModified":"2025-08-19T02:40:59+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.centaxonline.com\/blog\/bombay-hc-orders-svldrs-reconsideration-on-tax-dues"},"wordCount":488,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.centaxonline.com\/blog\/#organization"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.centaxonline.com\/blog\/bombay-hc-orders-svldrs-reconsideration-on-tax-dues#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.centaxonline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/3.-Bombay-HC-Orders-SVLDRS-Reconsideration-Tax-Dues-Quantified-Before-Cut-off-Date.jpg","articleSection":["Excise &amp; Service Tax","News","Case Chronicles"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.centaxonline.com\/blog\/bombay-hc-orders-svldrs-reconsideration-on-tax-dues#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.centaxonline.com\/blog\/bombay-hc-orders-svldrs-reconsideration-on-tax-dues","url":"https:\/\/www.centaxonline.com\/blog\/bombay-hc-orders-svldrs-reconsideration-on-tax-dues","name":"Bombay HC Orders SVLDRS Reconsideration on Tax Dues","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.centaxonline.com\/blog\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.centaxonline.com\/blog\/bombay-hc-orders-svldrs-reconsideration-on-tax-dues#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.centaxonline.com\/blog\/bombay-hc-orders-svldrs-reconsideration-on-tax-dues#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.centaxonline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/3.-Bombay-HC-Orders-SVLDRS-Reconsideration-Tax-Dues-Quantified-Before-Cut-off-Date.jpg","datePublished":"2025-08-18T11:57:27+00:00","dateModified":"2025-08-19T02:40:59+00:00","description":"Bombay High Court in Kaarya Facilities & Services Ltd. v. Union of India clarifies SVLDRS quantification under Section 2(r) Finance Act 2019, holding dues admitted during investigation as valid quantification before the cut-off date.","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.centaxonline.com\/blog\/bombay-hc-orders-svldrs-reconsideration-on-tax-dues#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.centaxonline.com\/blog\/bombay-hc-orders-svldrs-reconsideration-on-tax-dues"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.centaxonline.com\/blog\/bombay-hc-orders-svldrs-reconsideration-on-tax-dues#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.centaxonline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/3.-Bombay-HC-Orders-SVLDRS-Reconsideration-Tax-Dues-Quantified-Before-Cut-off-Date.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.centaxonline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/3.-Bombay-HC-Orders-SVLDRS-Reconsideration-Tax-Dues-Quantified-Before-Cut-off-Date.jpg","width":920,"height":540,"caption":"SVLDRS application rejection"},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.centaxonline.com\/blog\/bombay-hc-orders-svldrs-reconsideration-on-tax-dues#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.centaxonline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Bombay HC Orders SVLDRS Reconsideration on Tax Dues"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.centaxonline.com\/blog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.centaxonline.com\/blog\/","name":"Centax-Blogs","description":"","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.centaxonline.com\/blog\/#organization"},"potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.centaxonline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.centaxonline.com\/blog\/#organization","name":"Centax-Blogs","url":"https:\/\/www.centaxonline.com\/blog\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.centaxonline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.centaxonline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/12\/CNETAX-LOGO-1.webp","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.centaxonline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/12\/CNETAX-LOGO-1.webp","width":536,"height":133,"caption":"Centax-Blogs"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.centaxonline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/centaxindia"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.centaxonline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/2f5cfb3484d9dd23108a76636b12e805","name":"Karan Negi","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.centaxonline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/7735cfc607e8d5f19ef8fc2b92925d90?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/7735cfc607e8d5f19ef8fc2b92925d90?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Karan Negi"},"url":"https:\/\/www.centaxonline.com\/blog\/author\/karan"}]}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.centaxonline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5374","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.centaxonline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.centaxonline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.centaxonline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/10"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.centaxonline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=5374"}],"version-history":[{"count":6,"href":"https:\/\/www.centaxonline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5374\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":5409,"href":"https:\/\/www.centaxonline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5374\/revisions\/5409"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.centaxonline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/5396"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.centaxonline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=5374"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.centaxonline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=5374"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.centaxonline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=5374"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}