<?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>2025 (3) TMI 1061 - CESTAT HYDERABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=767675</link>
    <description>The CESTAT Hyderabad held that lease transactions involving transfer of effective control and possession to customers constitute deemed sale rather than supply of tangible goods service, making them not liable to service tax. The tribunal applied the SC&#039;s BSNL judgment parameters to determine whether effective control and possession transferred to customers. Following consistent decisions by Chennai and Chandigarh Benches in similar cases involving the same respondent, the tribunal concluded the transactions were deemed sales, not services. The department&#039;s appeal was dismissed and the original order was sustained.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 20 Mar 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 22 Mar 2025 08:34:45 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=808306" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (3) TMI 1061 - CESTAT HYDERABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=767675</link>
      <description>The CESTAT Hyderabad held that lease transactions involving transfer of effective control and possession to customers constitute deemed sale rather than supply of tangible goods service, making them not liable to service tax. The tribunal applied the SC&#039;s BSNL judgment parameters to determine whether effective control and possession transferred to customers. Following consistent decisions by Chennai and Chandigarh Benches in similar cases involving the same respondent, the tribunal concluded the transactions were deemed sales, not services. The department&#039;s appeal was dismissed and the original order was sustained.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 20 Mar 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=767675</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>