Inter-State sale of bus bodies turns on contractual movement of goods as an integral incident of performance.

Bus body sales were treated as inter-State sales because the contracts required construction in one State and delivery in another, making the cross-border movement of goods an integral incident of the bargain. The transactions were therefore outside the Karnataka taxing power under the Karnataka Sales Tax Act. The discussion also notes that writ relief and refund were maintainable despite delay and the availability of an alternative remedy, because the levy was without authority of law and refund was needed to prevent double taxation, subject to adjustment of any lawful liability under the Central Sales Tax regime.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the bus body sales were inter-State sales and therefore not exigible to Karnataka sales tax under the Karnataka Sales Tax Act; (ii) whether the writ petitions could be allowed and refund ordered despite delay and the availability of an alternative remedy.

Issue (i): Whether the bus body sales were inter-State sales and therefore not exigible to Karnataka sales tax under the Karnataka Sales Tax Act.

Analysis: The tenders and contracts showed that the bus bodies were to be constructed at Madurai and delivered at Bangalore, and the movement of the goods from Tamil Nadu to Karnataka was an integral and necessary incident of the bargain. A sale does not cease to be inter-State merely because the contract does not in express terms stipulate movement from one State to another if such movement is occasioned by, or is a direct incident of, the contract. On the facts, the sales fell within the inter-State field and were outside the Karnataka taxing power.

Conclusion: The sales were inter-State sales and the assessment of those transactions under the Karnataka Sales Tax Act was without jurisdiction.

Issue (ii): Whether the writ petitions could be allowed and refund ordered despite delay and the availability of an alternative remedy.

Analysis: The assessee approached the Court after discovering the legal mistake following the Supreme Court's ruling and after pursuing revision proceedings, though unsuccessfully. Since the levy was without authority of law and contrary to the constitutional mandate against taxation without authority, delay and the plea of alternative remedy did not justify refusing relief. The Court also treated the mistaken payment as refundable, with adjustment for any lawful liability elsewhere, to avoid double taxation on the same transactions.

Conclusion: The writ relief was maintainable and refund directions were warranted notwithstanding delay and the alternative remedy objection.

Final Conclusion: The impugned assessments were quashed insofar as they taxed inter-State sales of bus bodies, and the assessee was held entitled to refund relief with necessary adjustment against any lawful liability under the Central Sales Tax regime.

Ratio Decidendi: Where a contract necessarily occasions movement of goods from one State to another as a direct incident of performance, the sale is inter-State even without an express contractual stipulation for such movement.

---