9911796707
TMI Blog1998 (9) TMI 609X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... at Chennai. For the tenders called for by the Pallavan Transport Corporation Limited (hereinafter called as PTC ), the Chennai branch office of the petitioner submitted the offer and the same was accepted by the PTC, in pursuance of which the petitioner s head office at Bangalore despatched the goods directly to the buyer, namely, central work shop of the PTC situated in Chromepet and in Pollachi. The petitioner by mistake treated the despatch as stock transfer and issued form F declarations to head office in Bangalore which issued pro forma invoice for the stock transfer. As the goods were despatched from head office by the declarations under form F, the first respondent has treated the transactions as local sales and the first respondent ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ced by the buyer only in the local branch and therefore there was nothing wrong in treating the sale as local sale. He also contended that the petitioners themselves had filed F form declarations stating that the movement of the goods from Bangalore to Madras was a stock transfer and only after the arrival of the stock to the branch office of the petitioner at Madras, they were taken delivery by the buyer and therefore it was really a local sale for which the first respondent had jurisdiction to levy tax and this cannot be interfered with by these proceedings. 3.. No doubt certain facts have also to be gone into in these proceedings to find out whether the sale was local or inter-State. The records have been produced in these petitions ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 1 and 3 clearly show that the purchase orders were addressed to the head office at Bangalore. Another important aspect to be noted in these documents is, in condition 3, wherein it is mentioned that the plywood sheets should be supplied to the buyer s central workshop at Chromepet and also in Pollachi. The quantities to be supplied for these workshops also is mentioned specifically. The other documents are the invoices of the petitioner for the delivery of the goods and all these invoices give the address of the buyer at Chennai. From these documents it is very clear that the buyer, namely, PTC at Madras, had placed purchase orders for plywood sheets with the petitioner s head office at Bangalore, in pursuance of which the petitioner had d ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... office at Madurai and branch offices at Karnataka and other places, had submitted their tenders to Karnataka State Transport Corporation (hereinafter called as corporation) for body building through their branch office at Bangalore. When the tender was accepted and there was a completed contract, the bus bodies were built at Madurai and then sent to Karnataka. The Karnataka High Court has held, in that case, even though the branch office of the assessee at Karnataka had submitted the tender, the parties knew that the movement of the bus bodies would be from Madurai to Bangalore in Karnataka and such movement was a direct result of the contract which would bring the transaction only under the CST Act for levy as inter-State sale. In A.L. Ant ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... conditions and specifications of the order to registered office and the branch office itself was concerned with despatching, billing and receiving of the sale price, the order placed by the customer was an order placed with the company and for the purpose of fulfilling that order, as the manufactured goods commenced their journey from registered office in Andhra State to the branch outside the State for delivery of the goods to the customer, it is inter-State sale. In all these decisions, the criteria considered was the movement of the goods from one State to other State as a result of the contract between the parties. The decision relied upon by the Government Advocate in State of Tamil Nadu v. Cement Distributors (P.) Ltd. [1975] 36 STC ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on the part of the petitioner. When the law is such that the movement of the goods have to be treated as inter-State sale, the mistake on the part of the assessee in transporting the goods under the form F declarations cannot be taken advantage of by the assessing authority, namely, the first respondent to treat the transaction as local sale. The assessing authority has to ascertain the facts from the records for the purpose of levying the tax and in this case, had they applied their mind properly, they should have treated the sale only as inter-State sale. But simply relying upon form F declaration, they have treated the sale as local sale and has assessed the tax under the impugned orders for the payment of the sales tax, surcharge, addit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
