Purchase tax exemption for resale in same form and condition upheld where brass ware retained its identity after polishing and engraving.

Purchase tax exemption under proviso (iii) to Section 3AAAA(1) of the Trade Tax Act applied where brass ware was resold or exported in the same form and condition in which it was purchased. The evidence and departmental notification supported the finding that polishing and engraving did not change the identity of the kora maal, so the goods retained their original character. The objection based on the absence of proof of an export-linked sale under Section 5(3) of the Central Sales Tax Act was treated as immaterial because the statutory exemption still operated if the goods preserved their identity and were sold outside the State. No perversity was shown in the Tribunal's finding.

---

---

Issues: Whether purchase tax was leviable on goods purchased as brass ware and later polished and engraved, or whether the resale/export fell within proviso (iii) to Section 3AAAA(1) of the Trade Tax Act because the goods were sold in the same form and condition.

Analysis: The controlling question was the applicability of the purchase-tax exemption under proviso (iii) to Section 3AAAA(1), which protects a purchasing dealer who resells or exports the goods in the same form and condition in which they were purchased. The authorities below had concurrently found, on the basis of evidence and the departmental notification clarifying the position, that polishing and engraving did not alter the identity of the kora maal. The challenge based on absence of proof of an export-linked transaction under Section 5(3) of the Central Sales Tax Act was treated as immaterial, because even on the alternative assumption that the sale was not inextricably linked with export, the transaction still fell within the statutory exemption if the goods retained their identity and were sold outside the State.

Conclusion: The purchase tax exemption applied. The finding that the goods remained in the same form and condition was not shown to be perverse, and no interference with the Tribunal's order was warranted.

---