Back
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
P.SAM KOSHY, SUDDALA CHALAPATHI RAO
Modern Crane Services – Appellant
Versus
Writ Petition Nos. 7858, 7860, 7876, 7879 of 2010, Writ Petition Nos. 6927, 6930 of 2014 – Respondent
ORDER :
1. Heard Mr. S.S.R. Viswanath, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Swaroop Oorilla, learned Special Government Pleader for State Tax appearing on behalf of the respondents.
2. These are six writ petitions where the petitioner is the same firm. The challenge in all these writ petitions is to the assessment order passed by respondent No.1 for different assessment years. The details of each of the writ petitions like the writ petition number, tax period, and date of impugned order for convenience sake is reflected in the tabular form below.
3. The assessment orders passed by respondent No.1 are one which have been passed under the provisions of Andhra Pradesh Value Added Tax Act, 2005 (briefly ‘APVAT Act’ hereinafter).
4. The whole dispute is in respect of the nature of services being provided by the petitioner. Admittedly, as would be evident from the name of the petitioner firm itself, the petitioner firm renders crane services.
5. The question which came up for consideration in these writ petitions is “whether the crane services rendered by the petitioner firm would fall within the ambit of ‘a service’ under the Finance Act, 1994, or will it amount to ‘deemed service’ wit
Effective control over services rendered is the key factor in determining tax classification under VAT, reaffirming that possession retention by the service provider precludes deemed service status.
The transactions of leasing infrastructure equipment constitute services, not deemed sales, as effective control remains with the provider rather than transferring rights to the user.
Point of Law : Crane services provided by respondent-assessee do not constitute sale as provided under Section 2(35)(iv) of the Act of 2003 and hence, order of learned Tax Board does not call for any....
Sale of goods – A necessary ingredient of sale of goods is transfer of property in goods subject matter of sale from seller to buyer – Only because a person is allowed to use certain goods of owner, ....
The central legal point established in the judgment is that the determination of a 'sale' under the Maharashtra Value Added Tax Act, 2002 depends on the effective control and possession of the goods,....
Transactions involving site analyser machines are deemed sales, not taxable as supply of tangible goods for use due to the transfer of possession and effective control to the clients, exempting them ....
Hiring of equipment with transfer of use is deemed a sale, exempting the transaction from service tax under the Finance Act.
The main legal point established is that the transfer of the right to use goods constitutes a deemed sale under the MVAT Act and is subject to VAT, while being excluded from the definition of 'servic....
The transaction involving bulldozer hire charges constitutes a works contract, not a transfer of right to use goods, as the respondent retained complete control over the equipment.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
