Charitable trust income application permits verified capital expenditure but rejects deferred pre-operative claims and requires reconsideration of con...
Reinsurance premium deductions require established regulatory breaches, while independently acquired software qualifies within the computer depreciati...
Rectification of mistake remains limited to self-evident record errors, preventing merits review through miscellaneous applications and preserving fin...
Tender creditworthiness conditions may extend to de facto Promoter Directors, with post-participation challenges generally barred absent arbitrariness...
Corporate representation in PMLA summons proceedings permitted through an authorised signatory, subject to directors' continuing cooperation and atten...
HC ruled that renting cinematographic equipment constituted a deemed sale with transfer of right to use, not a taxable service under Section 66 of Finance Act, 1994. The agreement demonstrated transfer of both possession and effective control to the hirer, evidenced by inspection rights, damage reporting obligations, and equipment condition acknowledgments. The transaction qualified as deemed sale under Article 366(29A) of Constitution, involving transfer of right to use goods for valuable consideration. HC quashed the original order that had incorrectly interpreted the agreement terms regarding possession and control transfer. The case established that where right of possession and effective control transfers, service tax cannot be levied as it falls outside the scope of taxable services.
HC ruled that renting cinematographic equipment constituted a deemed sale with transfer of right to use, not a taxable service under Section 66 of Finance Act, 1994. The agreement demonstrated transfer of both possession and effective control to the hirer, evidenced by inspection rights, damage reporting obligations, and equipment condition acknowledgments. The transaction qualified as deemed sale under Article 366(29A) of Constitution, involving transfer of right to use goods for valuable consideration. HC quashed the original order that had incorrectly interpreted the agreement terms regarding possession and control transfer. The case established that where right of possession and effective control transfers, service tax cannot be levied as it falls outside the scope of taxable services.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4805
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
