Transaction-wise proof for inter-State sales is required; findings based on samples and generalities cannot stand.

Inter-State sales liability must be determined transaction-wise, with each disputed consignment independently examined on lawful evidence rather than inferred from sample transactions or general business modus operandi. A finding based only on broad assumptions is unsustainable when the taxing authority has not recorded a separate determination for each individual sale. On that basis, the Tribunal's conclusion that all consignments were inter-State sales was set aside and the matter remitted for fresh adjudication in accordance with law.

---

---

Issues: Whether the Tribunal was justified in treating the assessee's consignment sales as inter-State sales without examining each individual transaction.

Analysis: The order under challenge proceeded on two sample transactions and the general modus operandi of the business, instead of scrutinising each disputed transaction. The governing principle, as applied by the Court, is that liability to tax on inter-State sales must be determined transaction-wise, and a finding based on mere generalities is legally unsustainable. Since the Tribunal did not independently examine the individual consignments, its conclusion that all the sales were inter-State sales could not stand.

Conclusion: The Tribunal's finding on inter-State sales was set aside, and the matters were remitted for fresh adjudication in accordance with law.

Ratio Decidendi: A finding that sales are inter-State sales cannot be sustained unless each individual transaction is examined and the taxing authority records a transaction-wise determination on the basis of lawful evidence, not on general assumptions or sample instances.

---