<?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 (3) TMI 1769 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=469380</link>
    <description>In a GST transition dispute over works contracts, prior co-ordinate Bench rulings were followed to hold that the differential GST liability reflected in the impugned order was reimbursable by the respondents. The writ claim was accepted on that basis, and the petitioner was entitled to reimbursement of the differential GST amount.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 14 Mar 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 15 Jun 2026 23:25:08 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=907086" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (3) TMI 1769 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=469380</link>
      <description>In a GST transition dispute over works contracts, prior co-ordinate Bench rulings were followed to hold that the differential GST liability reflected in the impugned order was reimbursable by the respondents. The writ claim was accepted on that basis, and the petitioner was entitled to reimbursement of the differential GST amount.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>GST</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 14 Mar 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=469380</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>