Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 569 (2.30 seconds)
Documents citing Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd. & Anr vs Union Of India & Ors on 2 March, 2006

Healthware Pvt Ltd vs Hyderabad-Ii on 10 October, 2025

Thus, it is a case where FHL were hiring the equipments on need basis and only for the sake of convenience these were installed by appellant in their premises. Thus, the agreement is providing them right to use equipments in terms of agreements but not an absolute legal right to use and operate at their own sweet will during the currency of the entire agreement period. It is a case of hiring of equipment. Therefore, keeping in view the guidelines of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Bharat Sanchar (8) ST/20380/2014 Nigam Ltd Vs UOI (supra), all the conditions cannot be said to have been satisfied so as to consider this transaction as transaction of deemed sale and in view of the same, we cannot agree with the submissions of the appellant that it is a case of deemed sale.
Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal Cites 5 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

The Commissioner Of Sales Tax, ... vs M/S General Cranes on 21 April, 2015

30.STR5_2009.doc is prior to the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of State of Andhra Pradesh & Anr. (supra) and so also the judgment of a Bench consisting of three Hon'ble Judges of Apex Court in the case of Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd. & Anr. vs. Union of India & Ors. (supra). With great respect to the view taken by the Punjab and Haryana High Court, we are bound by the view taken by the Apex Court and as such, will be required to follow the law laid down therein.
Bombay High Court Cites 11 - Cited by 0 - B R Gavai - Full Document

M/S Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd. vs Commissioner Trade Tax Commercial ... on 4 April, 2022

(iii) Whether the authorities below are bound to follow the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd. Vs. Union of India and others (Writ Petition (civil) 183 of 2003) dated 02.03.2006 duly followed by a division Bench of this Hon'ble Court in case of Union of India and another Vs. State of U.P. and another (Civil Misc. W.P. No. 673 of 1997) vide judgment dated 22.3.2006?
Allahabad High Court Cites 7 - Cited by 0 - P Agrawal - Full Document

M/S Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd. vs Commissioner Trade Tax Commercial ... on 25 April, 2022

(iii) Whether the authorities below are bound to follow the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd. Vs. Union of India and others (Writ Petition (civil) 183 of 2003) dated 02.03.2006 duly followed by a division Bench of this Hon'ble Court in case of Union of India and another Vs. State of U.P. and another (Civil Misc. W.P. No. 673 of 1997) vide judgment dated 22.3.2006?
Allahabad High Court Cites 7 - Cited by 0 - P Agrawal - Full Document

M/S. Indian Metals & Ferro Alloys Ltd vs State Of Orissa .... Opposite Party on 10 May, 2022

18. Applying the above parameters to discern whether in the present case the transaction in question is a sale, it is seen that in the present case there is no actual transfer of the possession of the aircraft in question to the user of the aircraft. The aircraft is at all times in control of the Pilot who is an employee of the Assessee. Even the maintenance of the aircraft is undertaken by the Assessee as are the statutory compliances in terms of the permit granted to the Assessee. Therefore, there is no real transfer of the right to use the aircraft in the manner as envisaged in 20th Century Finance Corporation Limited (supra) and as explained in the subsequent decision in Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited v. Union of India (supra).
Orissa High Court Cites 8 - Cited by 0 - R K Pattanaik - Full Document

M/S Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd. vs Commissioner Trade Tax Commercial ... on 26 April, 2022

(iii) Whether the authorities below are bound to follow the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd. Vs. Union of India and others (Writ Petition (civil) 183 of 2003) dated 02.03.2006 duly followed by a division Bench of this Hon'ble Court in case of Union of India and another Vs. State of U.P. and another (Civil Misc. W.P. No. 673 of 1997) vide judgment dated 22.3.2006?
Allahabad High Court Cites 7 - Cited by 0 - P Agrawal - Full Document

M/S.Poompuhar Shipping Corporation ... vs The Income Tax Officer on 9 October, 2013

This Court further referred to the decision reported in (2005) 145 STC 91 (SC) (Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd. V. Union of India) and held what is contemplated as held in the Apex Court decision to attract the charge under the Sales Tax Act on the transfer of right to use goods was that the possession given unaccompanied by transfer of right to use, in the sense of there being no effective control, would not bring the transaction within the four corners of the charging provision.
Madras High Court Cites 113 - Cited by 4 - C Venkataraman - Full Document

Sahara Sanchaar Limited vs Ce & Cgst Noida on 17 February, 2025

4.6 On perusal of these clauses and the definition of "Supply of Tangible Goods Services", it is evident that the instant agreement fulfils the condition of taxable service by way of supply of tangible goods including machinery, equipment and appliances for use (earth station and related equipment in the instant case), without transferring right of possession and effective control of such machinery, equipment and appliances. The registration certificate of the utility van, which was a part of Service Tax Appeal No.70439 of 2020 64 the equipment leased out, was registered in the name of appellant on 29.12.2008 and remains under their control, as shown in the fitness certificate issued by the Transport Department of Uttar Pradesh on 26.06.2014. The above referred clauses of the agreement and the registration certificate makes it evident that the assets continued to be owned and possessed by the appellant by applying the test as laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the decision of Adani Gas Ltd, supra, 4.7 Smt. Santosh Khandelwal, the cost accountant and company secretary with the Appellant, in her statement dated 20.03.2015, and submitted that they had given the legal right of possession and effective control to the lessee but she was unable to explain it in the light of agreement dated 01.04.2009. In his statement, recorded on 26.03.2015, Shri Hardeep Singh, Chartered Accountant and Head of Accounts of Appellant explaining the above referred clauses stated as follows:
Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal Cites 55 - Cited by 0 - Full Document
1   2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next