Export exemption for auction tea sales cannot be denied by reading in a territorial condition not found in the rule.

Rule 42 of the West Bengal Sales Tax Rules, 1995 exempts auction sales of tea intended for export, including export after blending or further processing, where prescribed conditions are met. The provision is not subject to any territorial restriction requiring blending, packing or export to occur only within West Bengal, and no geographical limitation can be read into the rule when none is expressed. Rule 42 operates independently of Rule 81, which concerns immediate export under section 5(3) of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956. Movement of tea between a unit or branch does not amount to a sale between distinct parties, and the use of Form F does not defeat the exemption. The prescribed declaration form was therefore required to be issued.

---

---

Issues: Whether sales of tea purchased at auction were entitled to exemption under Rule 42 of the West Bengal Sales Tax Rules, 1995 when blending, packing and export were undertaken outside West Bengal, and whether the authorities were bound to issue Form 9.

Analysis: Rule 42 granted exemption for auction sales of tea intended for export, including export after further processing or blending, subject to the prescribed conditions. The Court held that the rule did not impose any territorial limitation requiring blending, processing or export to take place only within West Bengal. The distinction between Rule 42 and Rule 81 was recognized: Rule 81 dealt with the immediately preceding export under section 5(3) of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956, whereas Rule 42 was an independent exemption framed under section 17(3)(a)(xi) of the West Bengal Sales Tax Act, 1994. The movement of tea from one unit or branch to another did not constitute a sale between distinct parties, and Form F did not negate the availability of the exemption under Rule 42. The authorities had therefore proceeded on an erroneous construction of the rule.

Conclusion: The petitioner was entitled to exemption under Rule 42, and the respondents were bound to issue Form 9.

Final Conclusion: The Tribunal's order was set aside, the exemption claim was upheld, and the ancillary relief for issuance of the prescribed declaration form followed as a consequence.

Ratio Decidendi: Where the language of an exemption rule does not impose a territorial condition, no geographical limitation can be read into it, and exemption cannot be denied by importing restrictions not enacted by the rule-making authority.

---