<?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>2026 (7) TMI 1166 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=795280</link>
    <description>Ancillary-service receipts connected with software licensing were assessed under the applicable tax treaty by applying precedent governing software licence transactions. The same issue for the preceding assessment year had been resolved under that precedent, and dismissal of its review left no distinguishing basis for reconsideration. No substantial question of law arose from the Tribunal&#039;s treatment of the receipts, which was sustained in favour of the assessee.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 02 Jul 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 20 Jul 2026 09:37:31 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=912479" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2026 (7) TMI 1166 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=795280</link>
      <description>Ancillary-service receipts connected with software licensing were assessed under the applicable tax treaty by applying precedent governing software licence transactions. The same issue for the preceding assessment year had been resolved under that precedent, and dismissal of its review left no distinguishing basis for reconsideration. No substantial question of law arose from the Tribunal&#039;s treatment of the receipts, which was sustained in favour of the assessee.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 02 Jul 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=795280</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>