Export sales after concessional purchases can attract additional levy where statutory language covers despatch "in any other manner".

Goods purchased at a concessional rate and later used in manufacture for export sales may still attract the additional levy under section 3(4) of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959, because the phrase "in any other manner" was read broadly and the statutory exception was confined to direct inter-State trade or commerce. The clarification mechanism under section 28-A was treated as valid, but assessment and appellate authorities remained bound to decide independently on the materials and precedent before them. A clarification may guide administration, but it does not displace adjudicatory scrutiny.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether export sales of goods manufactured from purchases made at concessional rate under section 3(3) attracted levy under section 3(4) of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959. (ii) Whether the clarification issued under section 28-A of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959 affected the validity of the levy or the appellate decision.

Issue (i): Whether export sales of goods manufactured from purchases made at concessional rate under section 3(3) attracted levy under section 3(4) of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959.

Analysis: Section 3(4) imposes additional tax where, after availing concessional purchase tax, the manufactured goods are not sold but are despatched outside the State in any manner other than as a direct result of inter-State trade or commerce. The expression "in any other manner" was read broadly, and export sales were held to fall within that phrase. The statutory exception was confined to direct inter-State trade or commerce, and export sales were not brought within it.

Conclusion: The levy under section 3(4) on export sales was upheld and the issue was answered against the assessee.

Issue (ii): Whether the clarification issued under section 28-A of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959 affected the validity of the levy or the appellate decision.

Analysis: The clarification mechanism under section 28-A had already been treated as valid. A clarification could bind the officers for administrative purposes, but assessment and appellate authorities were still required to decide the matter independently on the materials and precedent before them. On the facts, the appellate authority was found to have relied on judicial decisions and not to have mechanically founded its order on the clarification alone.

Conclusion: The challenge based on the clarification failed and the issue was answered against the assessee.

Final Conclusion: The statutory levy on export sales was sustained, and the challenge to the clarification did not provide any basis for interference.

Ratio Decidendi: Where goods are purchased at a concessional rate and the manufactured goods are subsequently exported, the phrase "in any other manner" in section 3(4) is wide enough to include export sales unless the case falls within the express inter-State trade exception.

---