<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2003 (3) TMI 676 - GAUHATI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=161303</link>
    <description>An arrangement for wire line logging and perforation was treated as a lease where the contractor retained ownership of the equipment but transferred the right to use it exclusively for the oil company&#039;s operations for consideration. Because the Assam General Sales Tax Act, 1993 defines sale to include transfer of the right to use goods under a lease, the contract fell within the statutory concept of sale. The contractual terms of exclusive use, supervision by the oil company, and payment of rental charges supported that conclusion. Authorities concerning immovable property and different statutory settings were held inapplicable, and deduction of sales tax at source under the contract was therefore valid.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 28 Mar 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 13 Jan 2014 18:47:43 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=342520" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2003 (3) TMI 676 - GAUHATI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=161303</link>
      <description>An arrangement for wire line logging and perforation was treated as a lease where the contractor retained ownership of the equipment but transferred the right to use it exclusively for the oil company&#039;s operations for consideration. Because the Assam General Sales Tax Act, 1993 defines sale to include transfer of the right to use goods under a lease, the contract fell within the statutory concept of sale. The contractual terms of exclusive use, supervision by the oil company, and payment of rental charges supported that conclusion. Authorities concerning immovable property and different statutory settings were held inapplicable, and deduction of sales tax at source under the contract was therefore valid.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 28 Mar 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=161303</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>