https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=253897 The note explains that procuring goods from a subsidiary and supplying them directly to an ultimate buyer was treated as an inter-State sale, not Business Auxiliary Services. The transactions were supported by E-1 and C-Forms, the goods moved from Karnataka to Jharkhand, and title passed during transit, bringing the arrangement within section 6(2) of the Central Sales Tax Act. The fact that the ultimate buyer was already identified did not alter the character of the transit sale. On that basis, no service tax liability arose on the impugned transactions. en-us Thu, 27 Nov 2014 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 16 May 2016 14:58:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=253897 The note explains that procuring goods from a subsidiary and supplying them directly to an ultimate buyer was treated as an inter-State sale, not Business Auxiliary Services. The transactions were supported by E-1 and C-Forms, the goods moved from Karnataka to Jharkhand, and title passed during transit, bringing the arrangement within section 6(2) of the Central Sales Tax Act. The fact that the ultimate buyer was already identified did not alter the character of the transit sale. On that basis, no service tax liability arose on the impugned transactions. Case-Laws Service Tax Thu, 27 Nov 2014 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=253897