https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=219919 A service provider executing well logging operations with its own equipment was not liable to register as a dealer under the Tripura Value Added Tax Act, 2004, because the contract was one for services and not a transfer of the right to use goods. The equipment remained in the petitioner's ownership and control, and there was no material showing sale, deemed sale, works contract transfer, or any taxable transfer of goods. The earlier decision between the parties had already held that the same contract did not attract sales tax on that basis. Rule 47 could not be invoked to compel registration merely because the petitioner brought equipment into the State for performing the service contract, so the notice seeking registration was unsustainable. en-us Wed, 29 Aug 2012 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 29 Dec 2012 16:50:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=219919 A service provider executing well logging operations with its own equipment was not liable to register as a dealer under the Tripura Value Added Tax Act, 2004, because the contract was one for services and not a transfer of the right to use goods. The equipment remained in the petitioner's ownership and control, and there was no material showing sale, deemed sale, works contract transfer, or any taxable transfer of goods. The earlier decision between the parties had already held that the same contract did not attract sales tax on that basis. Rule 47 could not be invoked to compel registration merely because the petitioner brought equipment into the State for performing the service contract, so the notice seeking registration was unsustainable. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Wed, 29 Aug 2012 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=219919