Inter-State sale of DEPB licences upheld where movement between States was integral and Tribunal findings were not perverse.

Sale of DEPB licences was treated as inter-State where the transactions occasioned movement of goods from one State to another within section 3(a) of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956, and the surrounding circumstances showed sales to buyers in different States without documentary proof of prior movement before sale. The Tribunal, as final fact-finding authority, could be interfered with in revision only if it relied on irrelevant material, ignored relevant material, or reached a perverse conclusion; no such error was shown. Section 21(5) of the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1957 permitted enquiry, but did not require a separate enquiry in every case.

---

---

Issues: Whether the sale of DEPB licences was an inter-State sale exigible to tax under the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956, and whether the Tribunal's finding was perverse or required interference in revision.

Analysis: A sale is treated as inter-State under section 3(a) of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 when the sale occasions movement of goods from one State to another, and the movement is a covenant or incident of the contract of sale. The Tribunal found, on the surrounding circumstances, that the DEPB licences were sold to buyers in different States, that the petitioner had no branches in those States, that no documentary material established prior movement before sale, and that the letters relied upon were self-serving and insufficient to displace the inference of inter-State movement. The revisional court also noted that the Tribunal is the final fact-finding authority and that its findings can be interfered with only if irrelevant material was relied on, relevant material was ignored, or the conclusion was perverse. Section 21(5) of the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1957 empowered the Tribunal to make an enquiry, but did not require a separate enquiry in every case.

Conclusion: The sales of DEPB licences were rightly treated as inter-State sales, and the Tribunal's finding was neither perverse nor liable to interference.

---