https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=764875 CESTAT Hyderabad held that the appellant's contract with MPT for supply of tug services constituted service under Supply of Tangible Goods rather than deemed sale, making it liable to Service Tax instead of VAT. The tribunal found the contract did not transfer absolute right to use or effective control as the appellant retained substantial operational responsibilities including crew wages, repairs, and insurance. Service Tax was applicable only on payments received after introduction of STG service from March 1, 2008. Extended period of limitation and penalty were set aside due to appellant's bonafide belief based on VAT authority clarification. Appeal allowed in part by remand. en-us Mon, 20 Jan 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 21 Jan 2025 09:16:24 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=764875 CESTAT Hyderabad held that the appellant's contract with MPT for supply of tug services constituted service under Supply of Tangible Goods rather than deemed sale, making it liable to Service Tax instead of VAT. The tribunal found the contract did not transfer absolute right to use or effective control as the appellant retained substantial operational responsibilities including crew wages, repairs, and insurance. Service Tax was applicable only on payments received after introduction of STG service from March 1, 2008. Extended period of limitation and penalty were set aside due to appellant's bonafide belief based on VAT authority clarification. Appeal allowed in part by remand. Case-Laws Service Tax Mon, 20 Jan 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=764875