Real judgements, distilled

Legal Case Shots

Court judgements broken down into the case type, how the decision played out, and the lesson worth remembering, with the full judgement available as a PDF.

Frequently asked questions

Is this suitable for use in legal research and court filings?+

Legal Case Shots is built to help you quickly identify and understand relevant precedent. For citation in pleadings or filings, always verify against the full judgment PDF and current citation format (e.g., 2026 INSC ___).

How is a "lesson learnt" different from the judgment's holding?+

The holding is what the court legally decided. The lesson learnt translates that into a practical takeaway: what a lawyer should factor into case strategy or client advice as a result of this precedent.

Is the full judgment available, or just a summary?+

Both. Each case shows a distilled summary (case type, key holding, and lesson learnt) and links to the full judgment as a PDF for when you need the complete text for research or citation.

Can I filter judgments by date or case type?+

Yes. Use Advanced Filters to narrow results by decision date and by practice area, including Constitutional Law, Criminal Law, Service & Administrative Law, Family Law, Civil Property & Inheritance, and Labour & Industrial Law.

Can I search judgments by a specific judge?+

Yes. You can filter judgments by the judge or bench that decided the case, which is useful for tracking how a particular judge has reasoned on similar issues across multiple rulings.

What is Legal Case Shots?+

Legal Case Shots is a searchable database of Supreme Court of India judgments, each broken down into the case type, the court's key holding, and a practical lesson learnt, with the full judgment available as a PDF for citation or deeper reading.

Tax & Customs LawSupreme Court of India

M/s. K.P. Mozika vs Oil and Natural Gas Corporation Ltd. & Ors.

Not available · 2024 INSC 27Decided 9 Jan 2024
Not available
Justice Abhay S. Oka · Justice Rajesh Bindal

Background

This was a batch of over 40 connected appeals from Assam, where transport contractors had agreed to supply vehicles (trucks, cranes, tankers, trailers and buses) with drivers and crew to Oil and Natural Gas Corporation (ONGC) and Indian Oil Corporation (IOCL) for their operations. Tax authorities and the Gauhati High Court held that these contracts amounted to a "transfer of the right to use goods", a deemed "sale" under Article 366(29A)(d) of the Constitution, making the contractors liable to pay sales tax/VAT under Assam's tax laws. The contractors argued instead that they were merely providing a service (since they retained control of the vehicles, drivers and maintenance) and challenged the tax demand.

Decision Breakdown

The Supreme Court applied the five-test framework laid down in an earlier BSNL judgment (by Justice A.R. Laxmanan) for determining whether a transaction is a "transfer of the right to use goods": all five conditions, including that effective control and possession of the goods must genuinely pass to the user, must be satisfied for it to count as a deemed sale. Examining the actual contract clauses (the contractor supplied drivers/crew, bore all operating costs, insurance, and liability for damage, and retained control over parking, maintenance and deployment of the vehicles), the Court found that control never truly passed to ONGC/IOCL, only a license to use the vehicles for specific tasks was granted, not the "right to use" in the legal sense. Since the "effective control" test failed, none of the contracts qualified as a deemed sale, and the transactions instead fell under "supply of tangible goods" service tax under Section 65(105)(zzzzj) of the Finance Act (once that provision came into force). The Court allowed all the contractors' appeals, holding they were not liable for sales tax/VAT, while a related appeal by the Union of India was disposed of with liberty to pursue service tax recovery separately.

Lesson Learnt

Whether a hiring/contract arrangement is taxed as a "sale" (transfer of right to use goods) or as a "service" depends on who retains actual effective control and possession of the goods: merely making equipment or vehicles available for a client's use, while the owner keeps control over operation, maintenance and staffing, is a service, not a sale.

M/s. K.P. Mozika vs Oil and Natural Gas Corporation Ltd. & Ors. – Legal Case Shots | LegalAware