https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=443246 The Tribunal concluded that the renting of DG Sets did not fall under the category of "Supply of Tangible Goods Service" as defined in the Finance Act, 1994, as the possession and effective control of the DG Sets had been transferred to the client. The transaction was deemed a sale subject to VAT under the Gujarat Value Added Tax Act, 2003, and was not liable for service tax. Additionally, the Tribunal found that the appellant acted in good faith, leading to the demand being hit by limitation. The appeals were allowed, and the decision was pronounced on 12.09.2023. en-us Tue, 12 Sep 2023 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 19 Sep 2023 11:20:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=443246 The Tribunal concluded that the renting of DG Sets did not fall under the category of "Supply of Tangible Goods Service" as defined in the Finance Act, 1994, as the possession and effective control of the DG Sets had been transferred to the client. The transaction was deemed a sale subject to VAT under the Gujarat Value Added Tax Act, 2003, and was not liable for service tax. Additionally, the Tribunal found that the appellant acted in good faith, leading to the demand being hit by limitation. The appeals were allowed, and the decision was pronounced on 12.09.2023. Case-Laws Service Tax Tue, 12 Sep 2023 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=443246