Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / TMI Blogs / RSS

2014 (3) TMI 305

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....varaman, Special Government Pleader (Taxes) For the Respondent : Mr. N. Inbarajan ORDER (Order of the Court was made by M. Jaichandren,J) The Tax Case Revisions have been filed against the common order of the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal (Additional Bench), Chennai, dated 23.12.2003, confirming the order of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner (CT), dated 7.3.2000. 2. In Tax Case (R....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....der Section 3A of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, whether the possession of the goods has to be given to the user of the goods." 4. The order under challenge relates to assessment years 1991-92 and 1993-94. The respondent is a private limited company engaged in the activity of off-shore oil exploration for Government contractors, viz., O.N.G.C, Shipping Corporation of India and Madras Ref....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... disputed turnover for the assessment year 1991-1992 and 1993-1994, apart from surcharge, additional surcharge, and penalty was also levied, under Section 12(3) of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959. Aggrieved by the same, the respondent assessee filed appeals before the Appellate Assistant Commissioner (CT), Chennai. The said appeals was allowed by a common order, dated 7.3.2000. The said....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... used by the respondent company, by deployment of the equipments, with their specialised personnel, and that no other person had any access to the equipments, except the staff of the respondent company. As such, the Tribunal held that there was no transfer of the right to use the equipments. Even the O.N.G.C. had no right to use the equipments on their own. However, the physical possession and the....