https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=767750 Consideration for leasing fitouts and equipment under separately identified lease arrangements was treated as a deemed sale under Article 366(29A) because the agreements showed identifiable goods and a transfer of the right to use them. On that basis, the transaction fell within the constitutional sales tax/VAT scheme rather than service tax on renting of immovable property. The dominant nature argument was rejected because the fitouts arrangement was legally distinct from the premises lease. Service tax could not be levied on the consideration attributable to the fitouts, and the departmental appeal failed. en-us Fri, 14 Feb 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 25 Mar 2025 08:48:16 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=767750 Consideration for leasing fitouts and equipment under separately identified lease arrangements was treated as a deemed sale under Article 366(29A) because the agreements showed identifiable goods and a transfer of the right to use them. On that basis, the transaction fell within the constitutional sales tax/VAT scheme rather than service tax on renting of immovable property. The dominant nature argument was rejected because the fitouts arrangement was legally distinct from the premises lease. Service tax could not be levied on the consideration attributable to the fitouts, and the departmental appeal failed. Case-Laws Service Tax Fri, 14 Feb 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=767750