https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=425866 The dominant character of the transaction was the supply of the wig, not a taxable service under the Finance Act, 1994. Manufacturing the wig was the central element, while scalp preparation, fitment, colouring and maintenance were only incidental steps that facilitated use of the product. Because the wig had already been treated as manufactured goods and the fitting activity was merely adjunct to its supply, the assessment treating the entire turnover as service was unsustainable. The transaction was therefore to be classified by its predominant nature as a sale of goods, with only incidental service elements. en-us Fri, 08 Jul 2022 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 18 Jan 2023 14:52:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=425866 The dominant character of the transaction was the supply of the wig, not a taxable service under the Finance Act, 1994. Manufacturing the wig was the central element, while scalp preparation, fitment, colouring and maintenance were only incidental steps that facilitated use of the product. Because the wig had already been treated as manufactured goods and the fitting activity was merely adjunct to its supply, the assessment treating the entire turnover as service was unsustainable. The transaction was therefore to be classified by its predominant nature as a sale of goods, with only incidental service elements. Case-Laws Service Tax Fri, 08 Jul 2022 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=425866