Documentary evidence in sales tax references can overturn findings that ignore material records and show a Bombay sale.

Sales were not outside the State of Bombay and therefore were not exempt under section 46 of the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1946, because the assessee's returns, K and N forms executed by the Bombay buyer, and the bill drawn on that buyer showed a prima facie Bombay sale with delivery in Bombay. Correspondence relied upon by the Tribunal did not displace those documents, and the High Court held that the Tribunal had ignored the most material evidence on record. In tax reference proceedings, a finding reached by overlooking relevant documentary material can be corrected, and the sales remained liable to tax.

---

---

Issues: Whether the sales of the goods were outside the State of Bombay and therefore exempt under section 46 of the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1946.

Analysis: The decisive documents were the assessee's returns, the K and N forms executed by the Bombay buyer, and the bill drawn on that buyer showing delivery of the goods. These materials showed, prima facie, a sale by the assessee to a dealer in Bombay, and not an outside-State sale. The correspondence relied upon by the Tribunal did not compel the contrary conclusion, and in any event the Tribunal failed to give proper weight to the most material documents on record. In a tax reference, the High Court can interfere where the Tribunal's inference is reached by ignoring material and relevant evidence.

Conclusion: The sales were not outside the State of Bombay and were liable to tax; the answer was in the negative and was against the assessee.

Ratio Decidendi: A finding based on ignoring the most material documentary evidence on record can be corrected in reference proceedings, and such sales are not exempt as outside-State sales when the documents show a Bombay sale and delivery.

---