9911796707
TMI Blog1997 (4) TMI 473X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... elation to the said motor cars, the said motor cars moved from Chennai in Tamil Nadu to the above referred to Nellore and Chittoor in Andhra Pradesh. The said contention of the Revenue has been accepted by all the authorities below. 3.. The argument of learned counsel for the assessee before us is that either (1) the said sales were local sales in Andhra Pradesh and exigible to tax in Andhra Pradesh or (2) pursuant to the relevant sale contracts, the goods (motor cars) which were manufactured in West Bengal by Hindustan Motors, Hoogli, moved from West Bengal to the 22 customers in the above referred to Nellore and Chittoor in Andhra Pradesh and consequently the relevant sales are inter-State sales, exigible to tax only in West Bengal and not in Tamil Nadu. 4.. In making the latter of the two above referred to alternative submissions, learned counsel also submits that simply because the goods while moving from West Bengal, went through Chennai in Tamil Nadu, the Tamil Nadu authorities cannot levy tax on those sales. In this regard learned counsel also submits that the Tribunal has erred in relying on South India Automotive Corporation Private Limited v. State of Tamil Nadu [1980 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cisions, for an interState sale, coming under the above referred to section 3(a), the sale must occasion movement of goods from one State to another, that is, the sale contract must cause the movement of goods from one State to another. 9.. Regarding the contention that, on the footing that those sales were inside sales in Andhra Pradesh, they were actually assessed to tax by the Andhra Pradesh authorities and the assessment had even become final since the matter had been concluded even by the Andhra Pradesh High Court in revision, we must state that even though the copies of the orders of the Andhra Pradesh Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal and the High Court of Andhra Pradesh produced before us show that the sales involved therein were held to be sales within Andhra Pradesh the said orders relate not simply to the present assessment year 1969-70, but relates to four assessment years, viz., 1969-70, 1970-71, 1971-72 and 1972-73 and, in regard to assessment year 1969-70, the turnover involved before the Andhra Pradesh Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal was Rs. 16,96,044.61. In the above circumstances, we cannot assume that the above referred to turnover of Rs. 16,96,044.61 has any correlati ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d by the Commercial Tax Officer, Gudur on December 19, 1966. The inspection proved that the branch existed only by name and that the sales manager of Tvl. Royan Motors, Nellore was acting as commission agent. The shop at Chittoor was also got inspected by the Deputy Commercial Tax Officer, Chittoor on August 14, 1971. Statement was recorded from the branch manager, Thiru Jayaram. He had bluntly told the truth that sales or purchases were not done at Chittoor, that only orders were booked and that it was the Madras office which executed the orders. He also admitted that no account was maintained at Chittoor. Thus, the statements of the managers of Nellore and Chittoor branches prove that all sales of cars were done by the Madras office only. The books of the dealers show a turnover of Rs. 17,13,473.32 as sales made outside the State, out of which a turnover of Rs. 7,21,945.62 had already been assessed to tax under Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959 in TNGST. No. 33405/69-70 dated December 13, 1971 where inter-State nature of sales had not been proved. Hence the balance of turnover of Rs. 9,91,527.70 should have been made to dealers outside the State. " (Emphasis* supplied). ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d from Chennai to Nellore and Chittoor, took place. No doubt, appropriation of the goods for the sale contract is relevant only in the case of section 4(b) of the Act. But the fact that the books of accounts of the assessee show disputed turnover as sales effected by the assessee, will go to prove that pursuant to sale contracts between the assessee and the customers in Andhra Pradesh, the goods moved from Chennai in Tamil Nadu to Nellore and Chittoor in Andhra Pradesh. 12-A. In the above light we have only to hold that the ratio of South India Automotive Corporation Private Limited v. State of Tamil Nadu [1980] 46 STC 1 (Mad.) would apply even to the present facts. In fact, the Tribunal in its order observes that the facts in South India Automotive Corporation Private Limited v. State of Tamil Nadu [1980] 46 STC 1 (Mad.) are exactly similar to the present facts. No doubt, the learned counsel for the assessee sought to point out some variance in the facts in the case of South India Automotive Corporation Private Limited v. State of Tamil Nadu [1980] 46 STC 1 (Mad.). In this connection, we may point out what is stated in South India Automotive Corporation Private Limited v. State ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
