https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=234865 Temporary transfer or permission to use copyright was treated as a distinct service aspect, not a deemed sale of goods under Article 366(29A)(d). The transactions were held outside Entry 54 of List II because the producer retained ownership and substantial control, while the recipient obtained only a limited, temporary right for specified purposes. Applying pith and substance and the aspect theory, the levy was upheld as a tax on service activity rather than on sale, and Parliament was held competent to impose service tax under its residuary power in Entry 97 of List I. The challenge to the levy therefore failed. en-us Wed, 26 Jun 2013 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 14 Jul 2014 11:21:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=234865 Temporary transfer or permission to use copyright was treated as a distinct service aspect, not a deemed sale of goods under Article 366(29A)(d). The transactions were held outside Entry 54 of List II because the producer retained ownership and substantial control, while the recipient obtained only a limited, temporary right for specified purposes. Applying pith and substance and the aspect theory, the levy was upheld as a tax on service activity rather than on sale, and Parliament was held competent to impose service tax under its residuary power in Entry 97 of List I. The challenge to the levy therefore failed. Case-Laws Service Tax Wed, 26 Jun 2013 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=234865