Inter-State sale characterization prevails, defeating a second levy on the same turnover and preserving exemption rights.

An earlier decision in the assessee's own case had already held that the vendor's sale occasioned movement of goods from Tamil Nadu to outside the State and was therefore an inter-State sale. That ruling also rejected characterisation of the transaction as a transfer by lorry receipt, because the goods were delivered to the carrier under the contract and property passed at that stage. In light of that prior determination, a later levy treating the same turnover as a second inter-State sale could not stand, and exemption under the Central Sales Tax framework was available on the facts stated.

---

---

Issues: Whether the turnover in question was liable to be taxed as a second inter-State sale, or whether the assessee was entitled to exemption under section 6(2)(b) of the Central Sales Tax Act.

Analysis: An identical controversy in the assessee's own case had already been decided in its favour, holding that the sale by the vendor to the assessee occasioned the movement of goods from Tamil Nadu to outside the State and therefore fell under section 3(a) of the Central Sales Tax Act. The earlier decision also rejected the contention that the transaction fell under section 3(b), because the goods were delivered to the carrier under the contract and the property passed at that stage, not by transfer of the lorry receipts. Since the Tribunal failed to give effect to the final relief granted in that earlier decision, the impugned order could not stand.

Conclusion: The levy on the alleged second inter-State sale was unsustainable, and the assessee was entitled to exemption under section 6(2)(b) of the Central Sales Tax Act.

Ratio Decidendi: Where an earlier decision in the assessee's own case has conclusively held that the transaction is an inter-State sale under section 3(a), a subsequent levy treating the same turnover as a second inter-State sale cannot be sustained.

---