Form I-A declarations protect seller deductions; purchaser misuse affects the buyer, not the selling dealer.

Goods notified as tax-free could be deducted from a seller's gross turnover when the prescribed Form I-A declaration was furnished and the notification conditions were satisfied at the time of sale. The seller's entitlement depended on obtaining the declaration and meeting the certification requirements; it did not extend to monitoring the purchaser's later use of the goods. Any subsequent diversion or misuse by the purchaser affected the purchaser's exemption, not the seller's deduction. The department's proper remedy was to proceed against the purchasing dealer if the declaration was breached, so the seller could not be taxed merely because the goods were later put to a different use.

---

---

Issues: Whether the selling dealer could be denied deduction and taxed merely because the purchasing dealer allegedly diverted the goods from the use stated in Form I-A declaration.

Analysis: Under the sales tax scheme, goods notified as tax-free under section 6 could be deducted from the selling dealer's gross turnover when the prescribed declaration in Form I-A was furnished and the other conditions of the notification were satisfied. The Court held that the selling dealer's entitlement depended on production of the declaration and compliance with the notification at the time of sale. Once the purchasing dealer had issued Form I-A and the certification requirement was met, the selling dealer was not required to monitor how the purchaser subsequently used the goods. Any misuse or diversion of the goods would affect the purchaser's exemption and not the seller's deduction. The proper course for the department was to proceed against the purchasing dealer if contravention of the declaration was established.

Conclusion: The selling dealer was not liable to be taxed on the alleged change in user by the purchasing dealer, and the assessment made on that basis could not stand.

---