9911796707
TMI Blog1954 (7) TMI 17X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ses relate to offences under the Sales Tax Act and all the respondents reside out of the State of Madras. The case for the prose- cution is that the respondents were doing business and effecting sales of their respective goods in Fort Cochin which is within the State of Madras and therefore they are liable to pay sales tax to the Madras State. Evidence was let in to show that the goods were delive ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e footing and in fact presuming, that the agreements of sale were not entered into in Fort Cochin, within the Madras State. In the absence of any evidence as to the place where the contract was entered into and in the face of the positive evidence let in by the prosecution that these goods were delivered at Fort Cochin and the prices for these goods were paid at Fort Cochin, one would have thought ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 3 S.T.C. 396; (1952) 2 M.L.J. 593. decision in Poppatlal Shah v. State of Madras(1), went up to the Supreme Court and their Lordships have held, disagreeing with the decision of this Court, that the sales must be considered to have been effected at the place where the property in the goods passed and not merely at the place where the contract of sale is entered into: Poppatlal Shah v. State of Mad ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of sale were entered into outside Fort Cochin but that as a matter of fact the property in the goods had passed to the buyer outside Fort Cochin, then the onus lies on them to prove it. They have not discharged that onus in these cases. It is not disputed that in all these cases the goods were delivered at Fort Cochin and were paid for there. The prosecution therefore has proved its case and the g ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... C. A. No. 497 of 1953 it is reduced from Rs. 200 to Rs. 100. The excess fine wherever it has been paid will be refunded to the respective accused. But the tax which has been ordered to be paid by the first Court will remain in all these cases. Two months time is granted for payment of the tax and the fine. Appeals allowed. (1) [1952] 3 S.T.C. 396; (1952) 2 M.L.J. 593. (2) [1953] 4 S.T.C. 188; ( ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
