1956 (2) TMI 51

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... tion took place in the then Province of Madras, whereas the plaintiff's case is that no part of it ever took place in Madras. The learned City Civil judge found that the sales tax was rightly and legitimately levied and, therefore, dismissed the suit. According to the plaintiff, the company which is registered in England, with the Indian headquarters at Bombay and a branch in Madras used to en .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... eipts were in the name of the plaintiff both as consignor and consignee in order to comply with wartime regulations. On these facts, the question is whether the plaintiff is liable to pay tax. A similar case arose in O.S.A. Nos. 62 of 1951 and 54 of 1953, where Rajagopalan and Rajagopala Ayyangar, JJ., on 16th February, 1956*, held that no part of the transaction took place in Madras and as such .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e same sellers whose agents procure goods in the districts of the Madras Presidency. That being the case *Since reported in [1956] 7 S.T.C. 708. and especially since the learned City Civil Judge was of opinion that even if the delivery was at Bombay and payment of the go per cent. and the weighment and inspection was at Marmagoa, still the sale takes place in Madras, we feel that his conclusion is .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X