9911796707
TMI Blog2004 (4) TMI 566X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... food grains amounting to Rs. 16,75,196.81 alleged to have purchased on behalf of ex U.P. principal. The authorities below have negatived the claim of the applicant that these purchases were made on behalf of ex U.P. principal and were inter-State purchase and hence were exempt under section 3(a) of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956. The ground for not granting exemption as claimed by the dealer-applicant is, that these purchases were not made, on the facts of the present case, on behalf of ex U.P. principal. The question which fall for determination, therefore, is as to whether these purchases on the facts of the present case can be said to have been made on behalf of ex U.P. principal or not. The authorities below have found that the applic ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sary to produce the purchase order because the purchasers of ex U.P. came themselves and purchased grains through our commission agency in their presence and transported the grains themselves. No doubt the appellant had to assist them in procuring the truck, etc." Heard learned counsel for the parties. Learned counsel for the applicant has placed strong reliance on the following cases: (1) Commissioner of Sales Tax, U.P. v. Hanuman Trading Company [1979] 43 STC 408 (All); [1979] UPTC 809; (2) Commissioner of Sales Tax v. Bakhtawar Lal Kailash Chand Arhti [1992] 87 STC 196 (SC); [1992] UPTC 971; (3) Mukund Lal Banarasi Lal v. Commissioner of Sales Tax [2004] 135 STC 524 (All); [2003] UPTC 525. Elaborating arguments it was submitte ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... In other words, the movement of goods from one State to another must be the necessary incident--the necessary consequence--of sale or purchase. (2) It is immaterial whether a completed sale precedes the movement of goods or follows the movement of goods, or for that matter, takes place while the goods are in transit. What is important is that the movement of goods and the sale must be inseparably connected. (3) Where a sale or purchase, though effected within the State of U.P. occasions the movement of goods sold/purchased thereunder from the State of U.P. to other State, it becomes an inter-State sale. Such a sale cannot be taxed by the Legislature of Uttar Pradesh. It is taxable only under the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956." This ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... x U.P. principal took delivery of the goods, though denied by the applicant, in the State of U.P., therefore it was intra-State sale. This finding of the Tribunal, in view of the aforesaid judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Co-operative Sugars (Chittur) Limited [1993] 90 STC 1, is legally not sound. It has been held by Supreme Court that it is not necessary that contract of sale must expressly provide, for movement of the goods. It is sufficient if movement of goods is implicit in the sale. In my view the Tribunal was not right in holding, in the facts and circumstances of the case, that sale and movement of goods are unconnected and disassociated transaction. In view of the above I find sufficient force in the revision. The orde ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
