https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=793574 Equipment-hiring transactions were treated as a transfer of the right to use goods where the customer had possession, custody and effective control during the contract period, used the equipment to the exclusion of the owner, and bore the risk. On that basis, the activity fell within deemed sale under Article 366(29A) and within the VAT/CST domain, not service tax under supply of tangible goods service. Because VAT/CST had already been discharged, the service tax demand was held unsustainable and the related penalty was set aside. en-us Wed, 17 Jun 2026 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 19 Jun 2026 08:24:39 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=793574 Equipment-hiring transactions were treated as a transfer of the right to use goods where the customer had possession, custody and effective control during the contract period, used the equipment to the exclusion of the owner, and bore the risk. On that basis, the activity fell within deemed sale under Article 366(29A) and within the VAT/CST domain, not service tax under supply of tangible goods service. Because VAT/CST had already been discharged, the service tax demand was held unsustainable and the related penalty was set aside. Case-Laws Service Tax Wed, 17 Jun 2026 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=793574