<?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>2009 (11) TMI 834 - GAUHATI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=164437</link>
    <description>A contract for hiring cranes, tankers and trailers amounts to a transfer of the right to use goods, and therefore a deemed sale taxable under sales tax and VAT law read with Article 366(29A)(d), when the contractual terms place the vehicles at the hirer&#039;s disposal and confer effective, exclusive control over deployment, timing, location and operational use. Temporary physical custody with the owner, or provision of the operating crew, does not prevent that result if the hirer retains dominion for the contract period. Earlier contrary single-judge views and the cited Supreme Court order were treated as not altering this contractual analysis.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 25 Nov 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 24 Nov 2025 17:15:45 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=353825" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2009 (11) TMI 834 - GAUHATI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=164437</link>
      <description>A contract for hiring cranes, tankers and trailers amounts to a transfer of the right to use goods, and therefore a deemed sale taxable under sales tax and VAT law read with Article 366(29A)(d), when the contractual terms place the vehicles at the hirer&#039;s disposal and confer effective, exclusive control over deployment, timing, location and operational use. Temporary physical custody with the owner, or provision of the operating crew, does not prevent that result if the hirer retains dominion for the contract period. Earlier contrary single-judge views and the cited Supreme Court order were treated as not altering this contractual analysis.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT / Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 25 Nov 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=164437</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>