https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=448053 CESTAT Ahmedabad held that equipment hiring cannot be classified as "supply of tangible goods for use service" when right to possession and effective control transfers to the service recipient. The appellant hired equipment to clients who possessed and operated it with their own employees. Since VAT was paid treating it as deemed sale under Article 366(29A) of Constitution, service tax cannot be demanded per SC precedent in UFO Moviez India Limited. Appeals allowed, impugned orders set aside. en-us Mon, 08 Jan 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 10 Jan 2024 09:41:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=448053 CESTAT Ahmedabad held that equipment hiring cannot be classified as "supply of tangible goods for use service" when right to possession and effective control transfers to the service recipient. The appellant hired equipment to clients who possessed and operated it with their own employees. Since VAT was paid treating it as deemed sale under Article 366(29A) of Constitution, service tax cannot be demanded per SC precedent in UFO Moviez India Limited. Appeals allowed, impugned orders set aside. Case-Laws Service Tax Mon, 08 Jan 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=448053