<?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 (7) TMI 2037 - CESTAT BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=469346</link>
    <description>Lease of machineries and transformers was examined to determine whether it was taxable as supply of tangible goods under the Finance Act, 1994, or a transfer of the right to use goods outside service tax. The decisive test was whether possession and effective control remained with the supplier; on the stated facts, the customer had possession and free use during the lease period, while the supplier retained no effective control. The transaction was also treated as a sale for VAT purposes. Applying that principle, the arrangement was held to be a transfer of the right to use goods, not a taxable service, and the service tax demand and penalty were not sustainable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 18 Jul 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 15 Jun 2026 23:25:09 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=907120" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (7) TMI 2037 - CESTAT BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=469346</link>
      <description>Lease of machineries and transformers was examined to determine whether it was taxable as supply of tangible goods under the Finance Act, 1994, or a transfer of the right to use goods outside service tax. The decisive test was whether possession and effective control remained with the supplier; on the stated facts, the customer had possession and free use during the lease period, while the supplier retained no effective control. The transaction was also treated as a sale for VAT purposes. Applying that principle, the arrangement was held to be a transfer of the right to use goods, not a taxable service, and the service tax demand and penalty were not sustainable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 18 Jul 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=469346</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>