Subsequent inter-State sale tax jurisdiction follows the State where the dealer could obtain the declaration form

A subsequent inter-State sale outside section 6(2) of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956, was held taxable in the State from which the registered dealer obtained or could have obtained the prescribed declaration form. Where no C form was obtained or furnished, the retrospective proviso to section 9(1) fixed the place of levy and collection by reference to that State. On the stated facts, the dealer was registered in Rajasthan and could have obtained the form only there, so Rajasthan had jurisdiction to levy and collect the tax. The levy was upheld and the assessee's objection failed.

---

---

Issues: Whether, on the facts and circumstances, the State of Rajasthan was the appropriate State to collect tax on a subsequent inter-State sale under the proviso to section 9(1) of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956, when the prescribed declaration form was not obtained or furnished and the transaction did not satisfy section 6(2) of that Act.

Analysis: The assessee effected a subsequent inter-State sale after purchasing goods from outside Rajasthan, but no C form was obtained or produced. The proviso to section 9(1) of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956, as amended retrospectively, provides that in the case of a subsequent inter-State sale not falling within section 6(2), tax is to be levied and collected in the State from which the registered dealer obtained or could have obtained the prescribed form in connection with the purchase. Since the assessee was registered in Rajasthan and could have obtained the form only there, and since the transaction was not covered by section 6(2), the State of Rajasthan had the jurisdiction to levy and collect the tax.

Conclusion: The issue was decided against the assessee and in favour of the Revenue; the tax levy by the State of Rajasthan was upheld.

---