Inter-State sale requires contract-driven movement across State borders; buyer-arranged dispatch does not suffice for tax treatment.

A sale is treated as inter-State under section 3(a) of the Central Sales Tax Act only when the contract of sale itself occasions movement of goods from one State to another. Mere delivery to the buyer for onward transport, or despatch outside the State at the buyer's instructions, is insufficient. Where the contract did not require the goods to cross the State border and delivery was made at Firozabad, the movement outside the State was not occasioned by the sale. The sales were therefore intra-State and liable to tax under the U.P. Sales Tax Act.

---

---

Issues: Whether the sales of goods were effected in the course of inter-State trade or commerce, or constituted intra-State sales taxable under the U.P. Sales Tax Act.

Analysis: A sale falls within section 3(a) of the Central Sales Tax Act only when the movement of goods from one State to another is the result of, and an integral part of, the contract of sale. It is not sufficient that the buyer takes delivery from the seller with a view to transporting the goods elsewhere, or that the seller despatches the goods outside the State on the buyer's instructions. In the absence of evidence showing that the contract itself required the goods to cross the State border, and where delivery was made at Firozabad, the movement outside the State could not be treated as having been occasioned by the sale transactions.

Conclusion: The sales were not inter-State sales and were rightly treated as intra-State sales liable to tax under the U.P. Sales Tax Act.

---