GATE CSE 2009, Which of the following is FALSE? This is a question from GATE CSE 2009.

Which of the following is FALSE?
A]  There is a unique minimal DFA for every regular language.
B]  Every NFA can be converted to an equivalent PDA.
C]  Complement of every context-free language is recursive.
D]  Every non-deterministic PDA can be converted to an equivalent
deterministic PDA.

The answer provided to me (without any explanation) is B, which I think is wrong.
Here is my approach.

A] Every RL has an equivalent DFA and there is one unique minimal DFA
for a given RL. [so True]
B] Since RL are proper sub-set of CFL and every RL has equivalent FA
and every CFL has equivalent PDA, every FA can be converted to PDA but
not vice versa. [so True]
C] Given a CFL we can create an equivalent Total TM [RECURSIVE],
RECURSIVE languages are closed under complement. [so True]
D] This is only remaining option and by method of elimination answer.

Is my answer correct?
A is true, but I don't find your argument convincing (it simply restates the claim). See this question for example.
B is not the correct answer to this problem, because as you say it's true. Your reasoning isn't very formal though, and swaps some reduction orders. A correct reduction would be NFA → (superset construction)→ DFA → (trivial) → PDA.
C seems fine to me.
D is indeed left over, and is indeed false. Inherently ambiguous context-free languages can be recognized by nondeterministic PDAs, but not by deterministic PDAs.