Second-sale exemption requires proof of an actual prior taxable sale, and bill-only transactions will not suffice.

A claim that sales were exempt as second sales requires the assessee to prove an earlier taxable sale in the State. The court accepted the assessing authorities' reliance on a sworn admission that the bill issuer had not dealt in goods and had merely sold bills for consideration. Because the assessee did not seek cross-examination and produced no material to displace that admission, the transaction was treated as not being a genuine sale of goods. The assessee therefore failed to establish second-sale exemption, and the revision failed.

---

---

Issues: Whether the assessee established that the impugned sales were second sales in the State and therefore exempt from tax.

Analysis: The assessee claimed that the electrical goods had been purchased from Honesty Electricals, but the assessing authorities relied on a sworn statement of the person who had issued the bills, in which he categorically admitted that he had not dealt in goods and had only sold bills for consideration. In such cases, the assessee had to prove that the earlier sale was a taxable sale. The assessee did not seek cross-examination of the maker of the statement, and the record contained no basis to dislodge the admission that there had been no actual sale of goods to the assessee. The reliance placed on an earlier decision was rejected on the facts, as the material in the present case clearly showed that the bill transaction was not a genuine sale.

Conclusion: The assessee failed to prove that the disputed transactions were second sales exempt from tax, and the revision failed.

Ratio Decidendi: In a claim that a sale is a second sale exempt from tax, the assessee bears the burden of proving the existence of a prior taxable sale, and a categorical admission that no goods were sold can sustain the assessment.

---