https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=778183 A substantive refund right under the Tripura Value Added Tax Act could not be defeated by Rule 35 introducing a limitation period where Section 43 prescribed none; the refund claims were therefore not time-barred. Refund also could not be denied for want of a formal assessment, because the quarterly returns had been accepted as self-assessment, and the authorities could not later reopen the matter after the assessment period had expired. Procedural objections based on Form XXXIII, TDS challans, or a later certificate format were held insufficient to override the statutory refund entitlement, so the rejection order was quashed and refund was directed with statutory interest and costs. en-us Wed, 10 Sep 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 26 Jun 2026 16:53:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=778183 A substantive refund right under the Tripura Value Added Tax Act could not be defeated by Rule 35 introducing a limitation period where Section 43 prescribed none; the refund claims were therefore not time-barred. Refund also could not be denied for want of a formal assessment, because the quarterly returns had been accepted as self-assessment, and the authorities could not later reopen the matter after the assessment period had expired. Procedural objections based on Form XXXIII, TDS challans, or a later certificate format were held insufficient to override the statutory refund entitlement, so the rejection order was quashed and refund was directed with statutory interest and costs. Case-Laws VAT / Sales Tax Wed, 10 Sep 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=778183