https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=778183 The HC set aside the respondent's 11.3.2024 refund rejection under Section 29 and held that respondent exceeded its jurisdiction by effectively re-assessing time-barred returns. The court found the petitioner was beneficiary of TDS and had furnished VAT TDS reconciliation, challans, TDS certificates and statutory audit reports; respondents acted in bad faith and relied on impermissible technicalities. The HC directed respondents to consider the furnished documents, process the claims and grant refunds for VAT for the relevant years in accordance with the Act and Rules. en-us Wed, 10 Sep 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 12 Sep 2025 08:45:29 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=778183 The HC set aside the respondent's 11.3.2024 refund rejection under Section 29 and held that respondent exceeded its jurisdiction by effectively re-assessing time-barred returns. The court found the petitioner was beneficiary of TDS and had furnished VAT TDS reconciliation, challans, TDS certificates and statutory audit reports; respondents acted in bad faith and relied on impermissible technicalities. The HC directed respondents to consider the furnished documents, process the claims and grant refunds for VAT for the relevant years in accordance with the Act and Rules. Case-Laws VAT / Sales Tax Wed, 10 Sep 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=778183