Inter-State sale status is fact-specific, and check-post detention under sales tax law remains valid pending statutory remedy.

The character of a paddy transaction as intra-State or inter-State depends on the facts of each case and cannot be declared in the abstract in writ proceedings. A blanket circular treating all purchases by Yanam rice millers as inter-State sales was impermissible because the statutory conditions for inter-State sale must be satisfied transaction by transaction. Check-post detention of goods under the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act was also within jurisdiction, since authorities may verify transit goods and collect or secure tax where liability appears to exist, leaving the assessee to the statutory appeal remedy.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the purchase and movement of paddy by the Yanam rice miller could be treated as an inter-State sale so as to exclude levy under the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act and attract only the Central Sales Tax Act. (ii) Whether the Deputy Commissioner could issue a general circular treating all such purchases by Yanam rice millers as inter-State sales. (iii) Whether detention of goods at the check-post under section 29 of the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act was without jurisdiction and liable to be quashed in writ proceedings.

Issue (i): Whether the purchase and movement of paddy by the Yanam rice miller could be treated as an inter-State sale so as to exclude levy under the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act and attract only the Central Sales Tax Act.

Analysis: The character of a transaction as intra-State or inter-State depends on the facts of the particular case and on whether the sale occasioned movement of goods from one State to another, or was effected by transfer of documents of title during such movement. The question cannot be answered in the abstract in a writ petition, because it involves a mixed question of fact and law requiring determination by the proper authority. The existence of transport documents and the Government memo did not by themselves establish the legal character of every transaction.

Conclusion: The issue was not decided in favour of the petitioner; the Court declined to hold in writ proceedings that the transactions were necessarily inter-State sales.

Issue (ii): Whether the Deputy Commissioner could issue a general circular treating all such purchases by Yanam rice millers as inter-State sales.

Analysis: A blanket instruction was impermissible because the tax character of each purchase depends upon its own facts and circumstances. Even if the buyer transports goods outside the State, that fact alone does not convert a completed intra-State sale into an inter-State sale. Since section 3 of the Central Sales Tax Act applies only where the statutory conditions are satisfied, no general direction could validly pre-judge all such transactions.

Conclusion: The Court held that the general circular could not validly declare all purchases by Yanam rice millers to be inter-State sales.

Issue (iii): Whether detention of goods at the check-post under section 29 of the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act was without jurisdiction and liable to be quashed in writ proceedings.

Analysis: Section 29 and the connected rules empower check-post authorities to verify goods in transit and to collect tax where tax liability appears to exist and has not been discharged. A casual trader is also subject to the procedure under rule 14, and a person disputing collection at the check-post has a statutory appeal remedy under the Act. In that scheme, the mere detention of goods pending payment or security could not be treated as illegal or incompetent, and writ relief was not available to bypass the statutory remedy.

Conclusion: The detention was held to be within jurisdiction, and the petitioner was relegated to the statutory appeal remedy.

Final Conclusion: The writ petition failed because the Court found no basis to grant a general prohibition against check-post action or a blanket declaration against sales tax liability, and the petitioner's challenge had to be pursued through the remedy provided by the taxing statute.

Ratio Decidendi: Whether a sale is intra-State or inter-State is a fact-dependent mixed question that cannot be determined by a general writ declaration, and statutory check-post powers under the sales tax law may be exercised where tax liability is prima facie attracted, leaving the assessee to the remedy of appeal.

---