<?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 (8) TMI 116 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=441137</link>
    <description>The governing test for a transfer of the right to use goods is whether the goods are identified, the transferee acquires a legal right to use them, and the transferor is excluded during that period. On the agreement and work order read as a whole, the tank trucks remained registered in the assessee&#039;s name, the permits and licences were retained by the assessee, and the assessee bore the operating expenses and risks. HPCL only regulated how transportation services were to be performed, so the assessee retained possession and effective control. The arrangement was therefore transportation service, not a transfer of the right to use goods, and was not a deemed sale under the MVAT Act.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 01 Aug 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 08 Aug 2025 12:15:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=721400" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2023 (8) TMI 116 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=441137</link>
      <description>The governing test for a transfer of the right to use goods is whether the goods are identified, the transferee acquires a legal right to use them, and the transferor is excluded during that period. On the agreement and work order read as a whole, the tank trucks remained registered in the assessee&#039;s name, the permits and licences were retained by the assessee, and the assessee bore the operating expenses and risks. HPCL only regulated how transportation services were to be performed, so the assessee retained possession and effective control. The arrangement was therefore transportation service, not a transfer of the right to use goods, and was not a deemed sale under the MVAT Act.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT / Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 01 Aug 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=441137</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>