Karnataka High Court
For assessee
Case-law directory
Every ruling, in plain sight.
Search and filter tax rulings from the Supreme Court, the High Courts, the GST Appellate Tribunal and the advance-ruling authorities.
Case-law directory
Search and filter tax rulings from the Supreme Court, the High Courts, the GST Appellate Tribunal and the advance-ruling authorities.
5 rulings found
Karnataka High Court
Where Class-I contractors executed civil works for State and incurred additional tax liability due to GST introduction, having remitted differential GST and with State benefiting from works, contractors acquired legal right to reimbursement, obligating State and its entities to promptly verify and reimburse differential GST confined to incremental liability arising from GST transition
Madras High Court
Where petitioner operating duty-free airport outlets paid service tax on licence fees and conservancy charges under pre-GST regime and filed refund claims based on CESTAT ruling but were rejected as time-barred, following a binding Division Bench precedent in Union of India v. Flemingo Duty Free Shop (P.) Ltd., [2025] 174 processed with applicable interest
Karnataka High Court
Where contractor executed works contracts spanning KVAT and GST regimes, with portions completed pre-GST but billed and GST paid post-GST without collection from employer, writ petition was to be disposed of in terms of operative portions of order passed in Chandrashekaraiah v. State of Karnataka [2024] 158 proceeding
Karnataka High Court
Where petitioner, a Class-I civil contractor, executed government works awarded before GST replacing VAT and paid differential GST arising from transition, petitioner acquired legal right to reimbursement of such differential tax, with State as recipient of works contract service being bound by earlier rulings to reimburse only differential attributable to GST introduction subject to due verification
Karnataka High Court
Where petitioner challenged municipal authority's withholding of differential tax under GST regime for works executed under earlier VAT/Service Tax regime, as contract contained arbitration clause and arbitration was already invoked covering this claim, writ under Article 226 was not maintainable and dispute was to be resolved before arbitrator, with no adjudication on merits