US Constitution Trumps Presidential Tariff Powers
28 Feb 2026
Non-Compliance with Court Summons Amounts to Contempt: Allahabad HC Issues Warrant Against HDFC Life Branch Head in Cheating Bail Case
02 Mar 2026
Bank Can Adjust OTS Deposit on Borrower Default, No Cheating u/s 420 IPC: Delhi High Court
02 Mar 2026
Divij Kumar Quits CMS INDUSLAW for Independent Practice
03 Mar 2026
Global Lawyers Debate AI Liability in Autonomous Vehicles
03 Mar 2026
CCPA Fines Startup ₹8 Lakh for False Child Growth Claims
05 Mar 2026
Madras High Court Scoffs at Police Custody Injury Claim
05 Mar 2026
India's Criminal Investigations Face Systemic Conviction Crisis
05 Mar 2026
Kerala HC Slams TDB Financial Discipline in Ayyappa Conclave, Orders Auditor Report on Past Anomalies: High Court of Kerala
06 Mar 2026
Back
Next 
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR
Kimberly Clark India Pvt. Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Additional Commissioner of Central Tax, Bangalore – Respondent
ORDER :
1. In this petition the petitioner seeks for the following reliefs:
a) Issue a writ in the nature of Certiorari or any other appropriate writ or order or direction quashing the impugned Show Cause Notice No.54/2025-26 dated 25.06.2025 passed by Respondent No.1 at Annexure-A.
b) Hold that the support services provided by the Petitioner to KCS are not in the nature of 'intermediary' under Section 2(13) of the IGST Act.
c) Hold that the support services provided by the Petitioner to KCS qualifies as 'export of service' under Section 2(6) of the IGST Act.
d) Hold that the invocation of Section 74 of the CGST Act in the present facts and circumstances is factually and legally unsustainable.
e) Hold that the impugned consolidated show cause notice issued for multiple assessment years is bad in law;
f) Pass such further order(s) and other reliefs as the nature and circumstances of the cas
The main legal point established is that the definition of 'intermediary' under the IGST Act does not include a person who provides services on his own account, and the determination of the place of ....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the characterization of services as intermediary services under the IGST Act requires a careful analysis of the nature of the services provide....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the petitioner's services did not qualify as 'Intermediary Services' and that the place of supply of services was not in India as per the rele....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
Listen Article