<?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>2023 (4) TMI 866 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=436840</link>
    <description>A crane-hiring arrangement was examined on its substance to determine whether it amounted to a transfer of the right to use goods and a deemed sale under the Rajasthan Value Added Tax Act and Article 366(29A) of the Constitution. The contract required the supplier to provide the crane with a driver and helper, carry out repairs and maintenance, and maintain the log book, while the recipient was entitled only to loading, unloading, lifting and shifting services. Because the recipient did not obtain exclusive control or possession of the crane, the essential attributes of a transfer of the right to use goods were absent. The arrangement was therefore a contract of service and not a deemed sale.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 13 Apr 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 22 Apr 2023 08:08:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=711459" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2023 (4) TMI 866 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=436840</link>
      <description>A crane-hiring arrangement was examined on its substance to determine whether it amounted to a transfer of the right to use goods and a deemed sale under the Rajasthan Value Added Tax Act and Article 366(29A) of the Constitution. The contract required the supplier to provide the crane with a driver and helper, carry out repairs and maintenance, and maintain the log book, while the recipient was entitled only to loading, unloading, lifting and shifting services. Because the recipient did not obtain exclusive control or possession of the crane, the essential attributes of a transfer of the right to use goods were absent. The arrangement was therefore a contract of service and not a deemed sale.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 13 Apr 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=436840</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>