https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=161003 Article 366(29A)(d) was treated as clear and unambiguous in covering transfers of the right to use goods, including lease arrangements, whether or not for a specified period. The temporary nature of the arrangement and the obligation to return the goods did not take the transaction outside the constitutional entry. On that basis, the challenge to section 5-E and the allied definitions in the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1957 failed because the amended charging and definitional provisions were not shown to be constitutionally infirm. en-us Tue, 04 Sep 2001 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 28 Dec 2013 12:24:18 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=161003 Article 366(29A)(d) was treated as clear and unambiguous in covering transfers of the right to use goods, including lease arrangements, whether or not for a specified period. The temporary nature of the arrangement and the obligation to return the goods did not take the transaction outside the constitutional entry. On that basis, the challenge to section 5-E and the allied definitions in the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1957 failed because the amended charging and definitional provisions were not shown to be constitutionally infirm. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Tue, 04 Sep 2001 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=161003