<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2025 (12) TMI 1812 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=467768</link>
    <description>A service provider rendering business support services to an overseas group entity was treated as supplying export of services and not as an intermediary on the facts found. On that basis, denial of refund of accumulated or unutilized input tax credit could not be sustained. The impugned refund rejection order and connected notices were set aside, and the tax authorities were directed to grant the refund with applicable interest within the stipulated time.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 12 Dec 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 01 Apr 2026 10:32:48 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=894452" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (12) TMI 1812 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=467768</link>
      <description>A service provider rendering business support services to an overseas group entity was treated as supplying export of services and not as an intermediary on the facts found. On that basis, denial of refund of accumulated or unutilized input tax credit could not be sustained. The impugned refund rejection order and connected notices were set aside, and the tax authorities were directed to grant the refund with applicable interest within the stipulated time.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>GST</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 12 Dec 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=467768</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>