https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=753395 Contracts for hiring launch vessels for a bridge project did not amount to a transfer of the right to use goods under the constitutional deemed-sale test in Article 366(29A)(d). The vessels were not placed under the hirer's exclusive control as identified goods; the petitioners retained possession, supplied crew, bore fuel and maintenance costs, remained responsible for repairs and loss, and could substitute vessels. Those features showed only permissive use with continuing dominion in the owner, so the arrangement was a service contract and not taxable as a sale under the Assam Value Added Tax Act, 2003. en-us Mon, 01 Apr 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 31 May 2024 15:04:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=753395 Contracts for hiring launch vessels for a bridge project did not amount to a transfer of the right to use goods under the constitutional deemed-sale test in Article 366(29A)(d). The vessels were not placed under the hirer's exclusive control as identified goods; the petitioners retained possession, supplied crew, bore fuel and maintenance costs, remained responsible for repairs and loss, and could substitute vessels. Those features showed only permissive use with continuing dominion in the owner, so the arrangement was a service contract and not taxable as a sale under the Assam Value Added Tax Act, 2003. Case-Laws Service Tax Mon, 01 Apr 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=753395